Money Moral Dilemma: Should my brother share the money if he sells the coin collection I gave him?

tain

Pollycat said:

I'm not being obtuse on purpose.
I don't even think I'm being obtuse at all.

I said "I wouldn't like to think that my sibling had sold a vintage (50 year old) silver bangle that I looked for long and hard over many months with the same hallmark as the year of her birth.
But if she did sell it, so be it."

So, no moral dilemma then.

I'm not the only one who can't see the moral dilemma.
You seem to be very much in the minority here.

I should add that everyone saying 'I personally would share the proceeds with my brother'/'I would discuss it with my brother' are agreeing with me. And there are a significant number of them people, often interlaced with the legal 'but you don't have any claim to it' as a qualifier. 

Pollycat

tain said:

Pollycat said:

tain said:

Pollycat said:

I do both as and when it suits me.

Give cold hard cash (never a gift card - Martin advises against them, doncha know) and a gift with sentiment.
But whether I give cold hard cash or a gift with sentiment, that gift is for the person to do whatever they want with.
Once I've given it, it ceases to be any of my business.
Of course, I wouldn't like to think that my sibling had sold a vintage (50 year old) silver bangle that I looked for long and hard over many months with the same hallmark as the year of her birth.
But if she did sell it, so be it.

I can't see the moral dilemma here (although to be fair, I can't see the dilemma in most of them).

Are you being obtuse on purpose just to disagree?

"I can't see the moral dilemma here"

"I wouldn't like to think..."

So, a moral dilemma then. Just because you're accepting of it, doesn't invalidate the dilemma.

I'm not being obtuse on purpose.
I don't even think I'm being obtuse at all.

I said "I wouldn't like to think that my sibling had sold a vintage (50 year old) silver bangle that I looked for long and hard over many months with the same hallmark as the year of her birth.
But if she did sell it, so be it."

So, no moral dilemma then.

I'm not the only one who can't see the moral dilemma.
You seem to be very much in the minority here.

So you personally are accepting of something you 'wouldn't like to think' about?

Do you have an inability to see that others may have the same thought process and not come to the same conclusions as you, therefore creating a moral dilemma? Because if you can see that, you are being obtuse. 

And quoting minorities when you've run out of actual persuasive argument is poor. I know I'm in the minority, and I'm not even saying I would take issue with my brother selling something I'd given him. I'm saying that there is a very real moral question to be asked regarding the sentiment and value placed on giving someone a gift beyond the legal 'you no longer own it so have no rights to it anymore'. I'd hope my relationship with my brother is beyond a legal one. 

You are misunderstanding what the sentence in bold means.
I'll explain:
I would hope that my sister would consider the thought I put into the gift (you were the one who brought up 'sentiment') and keep it.
But if she decided it was no longer her style or (unlikely) needed the money or for any other reason didn't want it I would not mind if she sold it or gave it away to a friend.
Once I've gifted it, it's not mine to have any say in how it is used or disposed of.
And I really wouldn't want her to keep something that is longer any use/interest to her simply because it was bought for her as a gift and a great deal of thought and effort had been put into the sourcing of that gift.

I really do not see the 'very real moral question' that you do.

And there is no evidence that there was any sentiment attached to this gift.
Or value - until the author of the dilemma belatedly realised 'some coins were very valuable'.

It's fine to disagree with me but please do not be rude.
Please do not accuse me of being obtuse.

gloriouslyhappy

Pollycat said: And there is no evidence that there was any sentiment attached to this gift.
Or value - until the author of the dilemma belatedly realised 'some coins were very valuable'.

The author said: During my childhood I collected old and rare coins.

Leaving aside the issue of sentiment, the author noted some of the coins were rare, and said the collection was done during childhood. We don't know how old the author was when interest in the collection was lost and it was given to the brother, but surely the author can be forgiven for realising in adulthood that a costly mistake might have been made, and surely the brother and the rest of the family would think sharing any proceeds would be the right thing to do. Very much a moral dilemma, IMHO.

Editing to add Pollycat's thoughtfully chosen silver bangle gift to her sister is an entirely different issue - the value was known, it was an outright gift, and both were adults at the time, therefore it's the sister's to keep or dispose of as she wishes.

Pollycat

gloriouslyhappy said:

Pollycat said: And there is no evidence that there was any sentiment attached to this gift.
Or value - until the author of the dilemma belatedly realised 'some coins were very valuable'.

The author said: During my childhood I collected old and rare coins.

Leaving aside the issue of sentiment, the author noted some of the coins were rare, and said the collection was done during childhood. We don't know how old the author was when interest in the collection was lost and it was given to the brother, but surely the author can be forgiven for realising in adulthood that a costly mistake might have been made, and surely the brother and the rest of the family would think sharing any proceeds would be the right thing to do. Very much a moral dilemma, IMHO.

Editing to add Pollycat's thoughtfully chosen silver bangle gift to her sister is an entirely different issue - the value was known, it was an outright gift, and both were adults at the time, therefore it's the sister's to keep or dispose of as she wishes.

I take your point, glorouslyhappy, but 'rare' does not always mean 'valuable'.
Indeed, a child collecting coins would probably not be in a position to pay a lot for a coin, even if it was rare.

And value of an item can change over time up and down.
I've seen enough antique programmes to know that what might have brought over £200 a few years ago would only make £50 at auction now.

tain

Pollycat said:

You are misunderstanding what the sentence in bold means.
I'll explain:
I would hope that my sister would consider the thought I put into the gift (you were the one who brought up 'sentiment') and keep it.
But if she decided it was no longer her style or (unlikely) needed the money or for any other reason didn't want it I would not mind if she sold it or gave it away to a friend.
Once I've gifted it, it's not mine to have any say in how it is used or disposed of.
And I really wouldn't want her to keep something that is longer any use/interest to her simply because it was bought for her as a gift and a great deal of thought and effort had been put into the sourcing of that gift.

I really do not see the 'very real moral question' that you do.

And there is no evidence that there was any sentiment attached to this gift.
Or value - until the author of the dilemma belatedly realised 'some coins were very valuable'.

It's fine to disagree with me but please do not be rude.
Please do not accuse me of being obtuse.

And you are not seeing the woods for the trees. 

Just because you conclude that it is for your sister to do as she pleases, does not change the journey to your conclusion, and the fact others may be more emotionally attached on that journey. My wife was given her nan's necklace when her nan died. Her mother would be beyond angry and upset if my wife sold it. Sentiment is important, even if you clearly have no value in it because the legal ownership is all that matters apparently.

Every time someone says that, if they were in the position of the brother, they would share or discuss the sale with their sibling - they are buying into the concept that a moral element exists. A dilemma, if you will. If there's no moral dilemma, then there is no discussion, no sharing, nothing. It's like buying a second hand car from a faceless sales person on a forecourt. 

There is also no evidence that no sentiment or value was attached to the gift other than a loss of interest. Losing interest is very much not the same as completely resigning any personal value in an item. 

You are being obtuse as you clearly understand my point, yet you want to create argument rather than debate. You're not discussing the value of sentiment, you're simply saying I'm wrong. So yeah, obtuse. 

mushmel

No, you gave them away so they no longer belong to you. Perhaps you should have had them valued before deciding just to get rid of them? If you had given them to a stranger you wouldn't expect them to share so why should your brother

Neruda

The brother who now has the coin collection faces a moral dilemma: perhaps he should share the sale proceeds with the brother who gave him the collection, even though he is under no legal obligation to do so. He has a choice. However, the thread was not started by him but by the original owner of the collection, who really has no choices to make.

A1Grandad

If you collected the coins as a hobby, you should have known that some might be of value in years to come so why give them away if they did not cost anything to keep, I have three brothers , two would share and one wouldn't., seems you had no faith in your collection and your younger brother would be the owner of a load of rubbish.

NBLondon

Neruda said:

The brother who now has the coin collection faces a moral dilemma: perhaps he should share the sale proceeds with the brother who gave him the collection, even though he is under no legal obligation to do so. He has a choice. However, the thread was not started by him but by the original owner of the collection, who really has no choices to make.

Exactly!  The recipient might have the dilemma, not the giver.

74jax

tain said:

Pollycat said:

You are misunderstanding what the sentence in bold means.
I'll explain:
I would hope that my sister would consider the thought I put into the gift (you were the one who brought up 'sentiment') and keep it.
But if she decided it was no longer her style or (unlikely) needed the money or for any other reason didn't want it I would not mind if she sold it or gave it away to a friend.
Once I've gifted it, it's not mine to have any say in how it is used or disposed of.
And I really wouldn't want her to keep something that is longer any use/interest to her simply because it was bought for her as a gift and a great deal of thought and effort had been put into the sourcing of that gift.

I really do not see the 'very real moral question' that you do.

And there is no evidence that there was any sentiment attached to this gift.
Or value - until the author of the dilemma belatedly realised 'some coins were very valuable'.

It's fine to disagree with me but please do not be rude.
Please do not accuse me of being obtuse.

And you are not seeing the woods for the trees. 

Just because you conclude that it is for your sister to do as she pleases, does not change the journey to your conclusion, and the fact others may be more emotionally attached on that journey. My wife was given her nan's necklace when her nan died. Her mother would be beyond angry and upset if my wife sold it. Sentiment is important, even if you clearly have no value in it because the legal ownership is all that matters apparently.

Every time someone says that, if they were in the position of the brother, they would share or discuss the sale with their sibling - they are buying into the concept that a moral element exists. A dilemma, if you will. If there's no moral dilemma, then there is no discussion, no sharing, nothing. It's like buying a second hand car from a faceless sales person on a forecourt. 

There is also no evidence that no sentiment or value was attached to the gift other than a loss of interest. Losing interest is very much not the same as completely resigning any personal value in an item. 

You are being obtuse as you clearly understand my point, yet you want to create argument rather than debate. You're not discussing the value of sentiment, you're simply saying I'm wrong. So yeah, obtuse. 

What if the wife didn't like it, stuffed it in a drawer and never looked at it. Wouldn't pass it to her children because they would only do the same?  

I was given some of mams jewellery and the wedding ring of her mam (my nana's), no way would I wear them. I was GIVEN them, they were mine to do as I pleased.

The value of sentiment in this post is not being discussed because it has been cut out of the op (if it was there when submitted). The rules on mse clearly state you discuss a moral dilemma on what is written, nothing more.