[latexr]

> (Aside: should the guys who drive an armored car that carries millions of dollars in bonds get paid more than the guys that drive an armored car that only carries thousands of dollars in cash? Does the amount of money handled change the difficult of the work?)

Possibly, yes. The amount of money handled might affect the likelihood of a heist, and the required preparedness of the robbers. Which in turn requires more skilled drivers facing a higher risk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsu6AhYzG_4

That aside was an unnecessary bad tangent which undermines the point.

[kevinmchugh]

If the trucks are otherwise identical the thing you should be most worried about is insiders. The cash being more fungible means you maybe should pay the cash drivers more, so they're never tempted to skim off the top or sell details to the heisters.

[mcguire]

Want to know something weird?

A convenience store or liquor store is much more likely to be robbed than a bank.

[latexr]

That isn’t weird at all. A residential home is also more likely to be robbed than Fort Knox. It goes back to the required preparedness of the robbers.

Either way, I wasn’t the one who picked the example. Seth didn’t ask “should a liquor store employee be payed more than a bank teller”. Which wouldn’t be a good example either, as we’d be comparing too many different axis.

[lex-lightning]

Devil’s advocate: they’re both clerks and the liquor store is more dangerous, so yes they should be paid more

[bluGill]

Not really, banks are well known to have protections such that you are likely to be caught (most of which I don't know - and those who do know are not talking). It is also well known that you don't actually get much money.

There are convenience stores that still don't have cameras. Liquor stores have liquor - which is probably what you want not the money anyway (money can buy liquor, but you have to go two places now)