You run a shop and someone steals $100

[Bboystyle]

Y'all are some fukking morons, seriously....

It's 100 and the answer was on the first page. The guy left with 60 worth of merchandise and 40 cash.

No
You're dumb. Write the problem as a math variable.

Guys loses 100 dollars = -100
Guy gains 60 dollars back from the stolen money but loses 60 from giving away merchandise so it evens out back to the original -100.
Guy gives 40 back in change so now it's at -140



Total loss= 140

 

[YeLovesBoston]

$100

nikka took 100 bucks from you then came back and traded 60 of it for $60 worth of items from you. Owner lost

 

[klientel]

No
You're dumb. Write the problem as a math variable.

Guys loses 100 dollars = -100
Guy gains 60 dollars back from the stolen money but loses 60 from giving away merchandise so it evens out back to the original -100.
Guy gives 40 back in change so now it's at -140



Total loss= 140

Kill yourself.

If the owner lost 140 then that means the thief gained 140. But he left with 60 worth of shyt and 40 cash. Where is the other 40 genius

 

[Bboystyle]

Kill yourself.

If the owner lost 140 then that means the thief gained 140. But he left with 60 worth of shyt and 40 cash. Where is the other 40 genius

He took a $100 plus the $40 in change u moron.

Learn math before u come in here like u feeling special. Write it out u idiot.

He took $100

-100

He came back and gave $60 back but took $60 in merchandise in return. That means it equals out to zero so therefore we are still at -100.

Register In return gives him an extra $40 as change. Now we are at -140.

learn math and then kill yourself.

-100 +60-60+40= -140

fukking idiot

 

[TRFG]

Ether yourself brehs

No I didn't, he lost the $60 too, he basically gave it away free

 

[Scuti]

40 dollars

 

[TRFG]

"Boss we had a terrible day today
we sold $3000 in hamburgers and the total of change we gave back was $2000
that's a fukking $5000 loss to the company"

- @TheRealfG talking to his manager at McDonalds

That doesn't even make sense you fukking queer

 

[Perfectson]

You run a shop and someone came in and stole $100 without your attention.

The person came back and used the same money to buy $60 worth of items from your shop and you gave him a change of $40.

How much money have you lost?

Explain your answer so we know you didn't do ya googles.

you lost $100

whether it's goods or money, you are net out of $100

he stole 100 (so you're down 100)
he comes back and gives you back the 100 (you're net 0)
he purchased 60 dollars (you're back down 60)
and you give him 40 back (you're back down 100)

I'm a CFA - so if I really hope you idiots don't come in here trying to argue with me

 

[MeachTheMonster]

If it's money lost without including the items then the answer is $40. If it's money lost including the merchandise monies then it's $140 total lost.


It could be a trick question where items aren't consider money thus u don't include them in the math

Edit: if u write it t as a math variable using only the money from the $100 then the answer is $80.

U lose $100 so u have -100. He comes in and gives u 60 so now you're at -40 then u give him 40 back so u lose another 40 which puts u at -80

No. He came back and gave you $100, which is why he gets $40 in change

 

[Bboystyle]

It's not that hard if u guys know how to add and subtract negative and positive numbers

Money stolen = -100

Money given back from merchandise = +60

Money loss from giving away merchandise = -60

Money loss from change = -40

Now write it out

-100+60-60-40= -140

Slap your math teachers

 

[MeachTheMonster]

No
You're dumb. Write the problem as a math variable.

Guys loses 100 dollars = -100
Guy gains 60 dollars back from the stolen money but loses 60 from giving away merchandise so it evens out back to the original -100.
Guy gives 40 back in change so now it's at -140



Total loss= 140

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

 

[Claudex]

You lost $140.

First you lose $100.
The when the guy returns you don't actually make the $100 back because:

1- He takes $60 out of your merch.
2- He takes $40 dollars of your cash with him.

so he actually takes $100 + $60 + $40 = $200 with him. And gives you back $60.

$200 - $60= 140.

Of course we can't calculate the merchandise cost, but because we're we're just gonna assume the cost of the merch is the price we sell it at. Brrr brrr.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

You lost $140.

First you lose $100.
The when the guy returns you don't actually make the $100 back because:

1- He takes $60 out of your merch.
2- He takes $40 dollars of your cash with him.

so he actually takes $100 + $60 + $40 = $200 with him. And gives you back $60.

$200 - $60= 140.

Why would he get $40 back if he only gave $60 for the merchandise?

 

[Claudex]

Why would he get $40 back if he only gave $60 for the merchandise?

The thief gets the $40 as change. So in my equation I count that $40 as a loss.
And as I imply in the calculations I made: even the $60 the fukk nikka paid is a loss to me, which is why I don't make that whole $100 back.

Addendum: I actually put my calculations the simplest way I could. First add everything the fukk nikka took regardless of the timeline, and then subtract what you made out the deal. And the loss becomes clear.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

The thief gets the $40 as change. So in my equation I count that $40 as a loss.
And as I imply in the calculations I made: even the $60 the fukk nikka paid is a loss to me, which is why I don't make that whole $100 back.

In order to get change he'd have to have handed you the stolen $100 bill back. At which point you'd be even.

You give him $60 in merch and $40 in cash you are only back to the original $100. There is no extra $40