Yeah. That reminds me of something that happened a few years ago. I had this bike that wasn't very fun to ride because the chain kept getting stuck. So I left it outside unlocked for someone to steal. And sure enough, it was gone the next morning. But later I realized, what if my action tempted an honest person into crime and made them a bad person? But on the other hand, what if they sold the bike to buy food for their family, helping their children survive? What if one of the children grew up to win a Nobel prize in agriculture and saved the lives of a billion people, who would overpopulate the planet and kill everyone? I hope you understand why your story reminded me of this.
I guess I'm unclear on why this is on LessWrong. Seems fine for what it is, but fail to see much connection here to the normal content of the site. I think this post needs more context.
Sounds like a stupid manager who takes unnecessary personal risks (cooking books) for no personal gain.
A man was hired to manage a faraway subsidiary. He alone submitted reports on the status of the factory, and he sent dividends back to the owners.
He began cooking the books, not for any malicious reason, but because the owners refused his request to reduce dividends and increase contigency reserves.
A few years later, there was a disaster. The factory was severely damaged in the worst monsoon in decades. He sent word that the factory was lightly damaged in the disaster, even though it would take months for his report to make it to the owners.
He used the extra funds to repair the factory and blamed reduced profits on the damaged local infrastructure.
In the long run, the owners made more money. The experienced workers, who would lose their jobs and have to start anew at a new factory, made more money.
The manager did not gain or lose however, his skills was in great demand in the area, and could've found a job for the same pay easily, even after the monsoon. No one ever knew about the manager's good deeds.