You run a shop and someone steals $100

[Bboystyle]

ok i'll play by your rules

so u start -100 in the hole cuz the money was stolen from you before any sales

the guy pays you $100
you're at 0 now

you give him the goods valued at 60 and 40 in change
you're at -100

Yes logically that would be the answer. BUT what I'm implying is this isn't a basic question. It's a trick Question to where u have to write it out as a math variable.

We agree if u lose 100 Then it's written as -100

Then the guy gives $60 back so he's now at -40. But the money he recieves from the merchandise doesn't count as a profit because again he's using stolen money so he loses $60 which brings him back to -100. And in return he gives him an extra $40 as change so now he's short -140.

U see how it works that way too? It's a trick question Breh

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Some dumb mufukkas in here

You don't pass out change for nothing.

He stole $100
He gave back $100
He got $40 in cash and $60 in merchandise.

The store owner is still only out the original $100. Even less if we take into account the actual cost of the merchandise

He didn't give back $100.

 

[Zach Lowe]

Yes logically that would be the answer. BUT what I'm implying is this isn't a basic question. It's a trick Question to where u have to write it out as a math variable.

We agree if u lose 100 Then it's written as -100

Then the guy gives $60 back so he's now at -40. But the merchandise he recieves doesn't count as a profit because again he's using stolen money so he loses $60 which brings him back to -100. And in return he gives him an extra $40 as change so now he's short -140.

U see how it works that way too? It's a trick question Breh

idk reading ur shyt is feeling like some art barr shyt now i'm done

 

[Zach Lowe]

He didn't give back $100.

he paid for the goods with $100

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

he paid for the goods with $100

at my reading comprehension.

I need some sleep.

 

[Tha Gawd Amen]

Some of y'all should never be accountants.

He takes the 100.

He's gives back the 100

You give him 60 bucks of merch

You give him 40 dollars of change

That's 100 bucks you lost.

Some of you would run fortune 500 businesses into the ground with your financial reporting. Having the IRS all in that shyt.

 

[Bboystyle]

idk reading ur shyt is feeling like some art barr shyt now i'm done

The mistake yall making is not treating the transaction as a loss. That's why u have to write it out. It's not about how much the thief gets but how much the store owner had loss. He's already down $100 to begin with and he loses more in the process.

 

[Zach Lowe]

The mistake yall making is not treating the transaction as a loss. That's why u have to write it out. It's not about how much the thief gets but how much the store owner had loss. He's already down $100 to begin with and he loses more in the process.

how does he lose more when the thief is just trading $60 of cash for $60 of goods

i'd rather u take the $60 of goods cuz it's only worth like $20 before the store owner marked it up

 

[Bboystyle]

Some of y'all should never be accountants.

He takes the 100.

He's gives back the 100

You give him 60 bucks of merch

You give him 40 dollars of change

That's 100 bucks you lost.

Some of you would run fortune 500 businesses into the ground with your financial reporting. Having the IRS all in that shyt.

Or some of u are too dumb to think outside the box and see this problem in another way. There's a reason why the OP posted this....

 

[MR. SNIFLES]

I LOST NOTHING. NAS DID SO I WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

He didn't give back $100.

How'd he get $40 in change?

 

[Bboystyle]

how does he lose more when the thief is just trading $60 of cash for $60 of goods

i'd rather u take the $60 of goods cuz it's only worth like $20 before the store owner marked it up

Exactly. He trading 60 cash for 60 trade goods so technically the owner is still short of the $60.

-100+60-60= -100

I just put what u said in math terms

Now add the 40 plus the change he gives him and how much is that? 140

 

[Tha Gawd Amen]

Or some of u are too dumb to think outside the box and see this problem in another way. There's a reason why the OP posted this....

Yeah, to the people like you over think this shyt like the missing dollar riddle.

 

[Fatboi1]

These answers

He lost $100.

Think of it like this. You got a PS4 game you was selling for $60 at your house along with $200 next to it. Someone came in, stole $100 from it and then left. You came back home, in a hurry to sell the game to someone who hit you up and it's apparently the same person(You don't know this though.)

Now all you got is $100 and the $60 game.

He only has a $100 bill.
He gives you that.
You give him the game.
You give him $40 change from the other $100 you had leaving you with in total $160.

So, you had $200 the start of the day, you then had $100 during the day and then at the end of the day you had $160.
You still lost $100.

Look at it like this, you practically gave the person $100 and they gave you back $60.
It doesn't matter how much you end up with, it matters what you lost. If that person didn't steal the $100, you would've had $260 at the end of that day but BECAUSE he stole $100 from you, you only got $160 at the end of the day meaning you LOST $100!!

edit: It doesn't even matter how much he bought from you. Common sense would tell you that had the person not stole from you, you'd have an extra $100 to your name regardless.

 

[Bboystyle]

Yeah, to the people like you over think this shyt like the missing dollar riddle.

Wait until OP comes in and makes u simple minded fools look dumb. There's a reason why he posted this