This guy was money focused. He believed in money in a way only very hardcore economists do anymore. His YouTube thingy was all about gold and silver, as though a group hallucination of the value of metal was important enough to destroy a (barely) functioning economy over.
@2 Yeah, crazy people are crazy. They go out and randomly shoot Democratic congresswomen targeted for death by major media personalities all the time. Randomly.
It might make a some sense if he had a bill big enough that the cabby couldn't change it. This is interesting though. Maybe he thought he'd make some sort of escape. Maybe only that one part of his life needed to be mad and there was no need for the rest of it to encroach
@10 Much of his writings seem to assume that he would not only get caught, but that he would die. All the myspace and other postings are in the past tense. That's what makes the change thing even weirder.
@3 interesting point...wonder why they used the term "change" instead of "cash" though?
I am rarely short on "change" and always short on "cash".
Maybe the terms are synonymous in AZ.
@5 I took you for one of the thousands of pundits that are making that exact claim. "This happened in a vacuum." "This guy is crazy so it has nothing to do with the fact we advocated for this persons murder.'
@6 I comprehended it perfectly, and it's a fairly logical jump to make.
@14 -- it's how I read it because it made the most sense in an utterly senseless situation. It's also possible Loughner only had a large bill (like a hundred) and they really did need change. I know _nothing_ about the cabbie -- so English might not be his first language. Reporters are notorious for making mistakes with quotes, as are law enforcement personnel, so I'm not willing to read too much into this specific word until (unless) it becomes something more.
@14, change as in change for a large note. If his fare was five bucks and all he had was a fifty, it would have been very suspicious to just say "keep it".
Maybe he had no cash at all, and the driver went into the store with him so he could visit an atm?
If not, it is weird, indeed. Although maybe he was crazy but not sloppy crazy, in which case @17 might be the answer. He didn't want the cabbie pointing him out to security -- that guy's kind of a nut over there! -- before he had a chance to approach the congress woman.
Cab drivers here in SF will sometimes tell you—drive in the city long enough, you'll inevitably have a one-way fare to the Golden Gate bridge. Not one of them has a story of a generous tip, and some have told me the would-be jumpers have skipped the fare altogether. I can only take them at their word.
Whether the guy was too stupid to break a large bill before getting in a cab, or too cheap to leave a large tip doesn't really matter. People are usually themselves, up until the very end.
Does no one consider that maybe he was nervous, and just buying a little extra time to get the courage to go through with what he'd planned? Also, he got to (presumably) case the scene of the crime on the way in, and approach it from behind on the way out.
I'm not saying he wasn't also politically motivated. But I think it's fairly safe to say he was not entirely sane.
I am rarely short on "change" and always short on "cash".
Maybe the terms are synonymous in AZ.
@6 I comprehended it perfectly, and it's a fairly logical jump to make.
If not, it is weird, indeed. Although maybe he was crazy but not sloppy crazy, in which case @17 might be the answer. He didn't want the cabbie pointing him out to security -- that guy's kind of a nut over there! -- before he had a chance to approach the congress woman.
Whether the guy was too stupid to break a large bill before getting in a cab, or too cheap to leave a large tip doesn't really matter. People are usually themselves, up until the very end.