you dumb as shyt. Why would you give him 40 dollars back if he gave you 60 dollars for 60 dollars of merchandize?
nah see u gotta write it as math
You run a shop and someone steals $100
- Thread starter sportscribe
- Start date
nah see u gotta write it as math
Bboystyle
FIRE MATT LAFLEUR
Yea it's an even trade so even equals zero.
So he started off at -100,then the even trade happens (+60-60), then what happens next?
He gives the guy 40 dollars in change as a result.
Thank u for proving my point.
Write it out like I said from the beginning
-100+60-60-40= 140
Done.
Bboystyle
FIRE MATT LAFLEUR
When will u idiots learn it's not about how much the thief gets but how much the store owner loses
those are the exact same thingWhen will u idiots learn it's not about how much the thief gets but how much the store owner loses
there are only two players in the game
what one loses the other gains
you're miscounting what the customer pays, he pays for 60 in goods
WITH $100
that's why you give him $40 in change at the end, cuz he gave EXTRA CASH
so you don't lose 140, you lose 100 like everyone's saying
Ohms Law
All Star
This thread is fukking wild. Do some of you have a post elementary school education?
Do some of you have a post elementary school education?Ask yourself why would he give back 40 dollars in change........
You definitely trolling right now breh. Nobody is this stubborn. So tell me this someone comes to your store and buys a 60 dollar ps4 game. He gives you 60 bucks you give him the game. Even trade right? You gonna give him an extra 40 dollars with the game too? You're just one charitable mfer aren't you?When will u idiots learn it's not about how much the thief gets but how much the store owner loses
it's
-100 (stolen)
+ 100 (money back)
- 60 (merch sold)
- 40 (change back)
= -100
your +60 is wrong, he pays with $100
if he paid with 60 you wouldn't give him 40 in change back, there would be no change
Bboystyle
FIRE MATT LAFLEUR
it's
-100 (stolen)
+ 100 (money back)
- 60 (merch sold)
- 40 (change back)
= -100
your +60 is wrong, he pays with $100
if he paid with 60 you wouldn't give him 40 in change back, there would be no change
His total out of that $100 he pays with is only $60. Your short $40 from that $100. Your crediting the full $100 in the problem when his merchandise only cost $60. Again u guys are worried about how much the thief gets back instead of reading the question of how much does the store owner lose.
If you wanna get technical he actually lost less than 100 $ because we can assume the shop keeper bought the 60 $ of merchandise for less than 60$ he's selling it at if he's making a profit. So its actually whatever the merchandise costs + 40$. But since we werent told how much the merch costs 60 $ is a safe assumption
ok u trolling
sportscribe
Superstar
Op posted this because there are dumb mfers like you in this world that not only can't think logically but can't even admit when they're wrong. Look at your posts you've stopped even responding to the logical arguments and are now sitting by waiting and hoping for the OP to save your ass
Bboystyle
FIRE MATT LAFLEUR
Breh let me try this again. Let's do this from the theifs point of view.
He has zero dollars
He steals $100 so now he has 100
He uses 60 of that to buy a shirt so now he has 40. U add the value of that shirt (60)to the 40 because we both agree it's a trade off so he's back to 100. As a result of that transaction, he gets $40 in change to top it off.
$140
I mean it's not that difficult. The thief can't lose the $60 from the transaction wether it's cash or merchandise, he can only gain. Where as the store owner can't gain a profit form the transaction, he can only lose.