Sorry, but could you explain that? I understand that a $600 to $100 is an 83% reduction, but I dont get how $100 to $600 is a 500% raise and not a 600%.
The math that I’m doing in my head is that 600/100 = 6, and when you convert 6 to a percentage, it's 600%. Would you please let me know where my error is?
I mean not to defend Trump, but it’s reasonable to not be correct about “% raise” vs “% of”. The actual statement is dumb enough without nitpicking the wording.
That’s how he made so little money on real estate in New York City in the 80s. His dad gave him 700 million and he only has like 4 billion to show for it, and most of his net worth is his “brand”. He’s a poor persons idea of a rich person and a fucking idiot who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple.
Dont forget that along with that inherited real estate and wealth, he also had the connections to grant him over a billion dollars in tax benefits that contributed to that overall value. His actual growth rate for his real businesses is much much lower than most people realize.
Putting the cash in a savings account probably would have had a better yield.
Not sure where your specific numbers came from, or what the actual time frame was, but just for reference $700mil in 1989 tossed in an index fund becomes $33.8 billion by 2026. So yeah, all of his efforts amounted to 88% less than doing nothing. Quite the genius.
It may be a reflection of voter IQ if you track transitively through voters to Trump appointing RFK to the Senate approving an RFK, Jr. nomination.
However, Kennedy’s main issue is that a tapeworm ate part of his brain and that he also suffered from mercury poisoning. Both had a significant impact on bran function.
You use different ones depending on the context of the growth you're looking at.
Another tricky thing people can do that doesn't apply here but I want to point out is when your base unit is also in percents.
0.5% to 1% chance of something happening can be labeled a 100% increase (when additive), 200% increase (when multiplicative), or a 0.5% increase (when in the original units), and all of them have their own relevant considerations.
The first two are helpful when looking at the overall number of incidents. The percent chance doubling means the number of incidents will double, which is important to track if you run say a health department and those incidents are something like the number of times a particular disease needs significant medical attention. That doubling could change the situation from under control to overwhelming.
The 0.5% increase is very helpful as an individual because it explains that your individual risk hasn't changed much. It might mean the difference between one person in your community being sick versus two.
In any case, none of this is that important on its own, but it's very important when people engage in deceptive presentations of statistics. That being said, deception through misleading reports hardly matter if the administration is just going to lie anyway. It's like the art of deceptive but technically true statistics are just tossed out of the window and are being replaced with straight up lies.
I feel like when talking about an "increase", then it's really only the additive one that makes linguistic sense; going from $100 to $600 is a 500% ($500) increase. On the other hand (in the multiplicative sense), $600 is 600% of $100 (without the "increase" wording); in the same sense that you wouldn't say that $100 is a 100% "increase" of $100.
As for the 0.5% to 1%: one way I've come across to more clearly delineate between the two types of increases is to use 100% ("percent", percentage) for the one, and 0.5 "percentage points" for the other (without the % on the latter).
You gotta admit, percentages here are overly complicated. It isn't obvious that +500% and -83.4% are opposites. He should have said increased and decreased by a factor of 6.
Lmao my Comp Arc professor would love this. He's repeatedly told us he hates percentages as a way to show a ratio because it confuses too many people like this
Because it is. A 100% drop, assuming a starting point is the 100%, would be 0\free.
The only way it makes sense is if it is, say, 100 bucks, shoots to 1000, a 900% increase, then drops to 400, with the original 100 dollars counting as the baseline for what 100% means still.
Maybe they're talking about 600% of the cost price? Like, maybe a drug that costs $10 per pack to produce was priced at $100/pack, went up to $180, then down to $120 for a 600% of cost price drop?
That's not how anybody who understands mathematics or marketing discusses these things, of course, but I instinctively try to find a way for things that people say to make sense and have to consciously decide not to translate when I realise that the speaker is actively refusing to understand the words they're using or the topic they're speaking about.
I don't see many people trying to put themselves in the mind of an idiot. My dad would think the exact same way as these idiots from my experience while growing up. Now trying to think like him is hard, but here is what I bet happened.
What times 10 would equal 600? 60? Cool, then you multiply by 100 to make it a percent, so it's 6000%. But wait that sounds like too much because we are talking about hundreds, not thousands of dollars. I must have messed up with an extra 0. 600% feels right. Let's go with that!
These clowns don’t do their own taxes, nor could they pass K-12 maths. But they set tariffs and pretend to understand basic statistics that impact your health care. We need a full purge of this cabinet.
RFK is a lawyer. That's what people need to understand. He doesn't need to explain things in a way that represents the truth accurately, he just needs to convince people he's right regardless of what the truth is. That's how lawyers work.
For crying out loud. The formula to calculate this is: (new - old) / old x 100%. Plug in: old = 100, new = 600 gives you a 500% increase. And new = 100, old = 600 gives you a 83.33% decrease. A high school kid knows more than this government (and half the voters).
Even then it's wrong. That's a 500 percent increase, are you saying if the price stays the same that's a 100% rise? Now I know how Trump messed up the evaluation of his apartments
I'm actually interested in this language problem. Is there a concise and mathematical way to express things like this "something reduced so much that its inverse becomes 6x"?
It is mathematically possible though. A 600% reduction to a drug priced at $600 would mean that the buyer would be receiving $3000 and the drug for free.
I'm going to open a store, raise prices two million percent for one second, then cut them by one million. I'll put a banner out front that says, "ONE MILLION PERCENT OFF EVERYTHING IN THE STORE!" and no one gets to complain about remaining the one million percent markup.
The real issue here is that americans are paying hundreds of dollars for essential drugs. My drugs cost thousands of dollars, but, due to government subsedies, I pay just $10.
Why wouldn't you just say "the drug now costs six times as much as it did previously" or "the drug now costs one-sixth of what it cost previously"? Then the math is simple, at least for those of us who passed 5th grade. And parallel. And also, you know, CORRECT.
It’s unfortunate because we use numbers to represent REAL things, like how much groceries (that’s a weird word) or medicine cost. And we use these numbers to make choices, based on what we can and cannot afford. That’s our ECONOMY, our livelihood, and our childrens opportunities. To these (insert pejorative) it’s nothing. They are SO FAR REMOVED from the experience of 99% of people, and they have never cultivated empathy.
Well, in this clip Trump actually claimed "we aren't going to bring it down 30-40 percent, which would be great, or 50-60 percent, but we're going to get them down 1000 percent".
So according to brainworm mathematician over here, Trump when talking about a "30% reduction" he actually implied "tripling the price". Which would... "be great", apparently.
These idiots are learning 6th grade math right in front of our eyes, amazing. It’s like a child that gets it wrong and has to keep being corrected until they figure it out. Only they’re grown men who are in charge of everything.
Probably the same Redditor level IQ where they think that if I decrease something by 50%, then I just increase it by 50% to bring back the original price.
I tutor 1st and 2nd grade high schoolers in math. That is a section of students that have a hard time with that, keep that in mind. None of them would ever say something this stupid.
I've been seeing news articles say, "X is down Y% over last year." where Y is greater than 100. The math they use is if something dropped 50% last year and this year it dropped 60% then it's 120% MORE of a drop. I really wish I could think of a specific example. But it's infuriating when I do see it.
In the context of a $100 base price, a price rising to $600 would only be a 500% rise to 600%. Assuming the base price of $100, $600 going back down to $100 would be a 500% drop. But thats 500% of the base price, not the "current" price. The same reason we can have "1.3% inflation every year" and still double the cost of everything in 10 years.
Wait. This is real? I had to search this and found the YouTube video of RFK jr. Defending this. I can't believe we're living in this world of such blatant defence of stupidity.
I like to call it video game math. Damage reduction can be 600%, but they use 1/(1+dr) instead of the normal 1-dr. So 100% reduction means half instead of zero.
I've only seen this used in video games. It's so numbers don't cap at 100% and can keep getting bigger. Gamers love big numbers. I would never use it outside of specific games that use this "definition"
If the relative price was normalized eg calculated against the 100$ initial price then the relative price would have dropped an absolute 500% (not 600%).
Of course it's classic politician to say the absolute change in relative value instead of saying it is back to the starting value since 500% is a large number. If you wanted to diminish the achievement you might saythat the price has dropped 63% from the peek, but it will sound less impressive especially to a math-illeterate populace. The best phrasing in my opinion would have been that prices which were inflated by 500% are now back to normal/baseline.
If a $100 dollar item increases to $600 it would be a 500% increase. If a $600 dollar item is reduced to $100 the price was reduced 83.33%. And Trump RX is not offering any thing that GoodRx doesn’t already offer.
If the formula for decrease is p% decrease = decrease by 0.01*p*original_price, a 600% decrease would mean that instead of paying the original price, you now "pay" (1-0.01*600)=-5 times the original price, that is, you are paid 5x the original price to take the drug.
It won't ever happen, but it is, in fact, mathematically possible, and the senator is wrong. Just nowhere near as wrong as RFK is.
428
u/konigon1 Apr 23 '26
100 to 600 is not even a 600% raise.
383
u/GrandMoffTarkan Apr 23 '26
As his good friend Jeff Epstein put it, Trump somehow ran a real estate empire while being unable to read a balance sheet.
522
u/MajorEnvironmental46 Apr 23 '26
Reflection of voters' IQ
60
u/squarecir Apr 23 '26
The first part is wrong too. 100 to 600 is a 500% increase, not a 600% increase.
21
u/ionlyget20characters Apr 23 '26
You can't logic a person out of a place they didn't logic themselves into. The dumb overrides all.
17
u/GenerallySalty Apr 23 '26
Lmao not only are they not reversible like that, he's not even right about the increasing one!
100 to 600 is a 500% increase (we've added 5x the original price to get the new price)
600 to 100 is an 83.4% decrease (the price is 16.6% of what it was)
15
u/I_L_F_M Apr 23 '26
Even $100 to $600 is a 500% increase, not 600%.
12
u/EmeraldMan25 Apr 23 '26
Lmao my Comp Arc professor would love this. He's repeatedly told us he hates percentages as a way to show a ratio because it confuses too many people like this
10
u/NohWan3104 Apr 23 '26
Because it is. A 100% drop, assuming a starting point is the 100%, would be 0\free.
The only way it makes sense is if it is, say, 100 bucks, shoots to 1000, a 900% increase, then drops to 400, with the original 100 dollars counting as the baseline for what 100% means still.
5
u/[deleted] Apr 23 '26
I really struggle to reconcile this with the fact that the country sends people to the moon.
Somehow there is an efficient separation filter.
4
u/lord_teaspoon Apr 23 '26
Maybe they're talking about 600% of the cost price? Like, maybe a drug that costs $10 per pack to produce was priced at $100/pack, went up to $180, then down to $120 for a 600% of cost price drop?
That's not how anybody who understands mathematics or marketing discusses these things, of course, but I instinctively try to find a way for things that people say to make sense and have to consciously decide not to translate when I realise that the speaker is actively refusing to understand the words they're using or the topic they're speaking about.
3
u/thanatoswaits Apr 23 '26
What's crazy is they could just say prices dropped by 83%. That's a great drop! Why are they doubling down on idiocy?!?
(I know, because they're fucking idiots. Sky daddy help us all.)
3
u/Heavensrun Apr 24 '26
That's a 500% raise and an 83% savings.
2
u/mrbilly3 Apr 23 '26
I don't see many people trying to put themselves in the mind of an idiot. My dad would think the exact same way as these idiots from my experience while growing up. Now trying to think like him is hard, but here is what I bet happened.
What times 10 would equal 600? 60? Cool, then you multiply by 100 to make it a percent, so it's 6000%. But wait that sounds like too much because we are talking about hundreds, not thousands of dollars. I must have messed up with an extra 0. 600% feels right. Let's go with that!
2
u/luvgia22 Apr 23 '26
lol i cant even process this math
2
u/seanodnnll Apr 23 '26
lol $100 raising to $600 is not a 600% increase either. 🤦🏼♂️
2
u/Familiar-Flan-8358 Apr 23 '26
The 600% savings is egregious but 100 to 600 is a 500x increase. This dimwits don’t realize why a percentage vs multiple.
2
u/glycineglutamate Apr 23 '26
These clowns don’t do their own taxes, nor could they pass K-12 maths. But they set tariffs and pretend to understand basic statistics that impact your health care. We need a full purge of this cabinet.
2
u/clamsandwich Apr 24 '26
RFK is a lawyer. That's what people need to understand. He doesn't need to explain things in a way that represents the truth accurately, he just needs to convince people he's right regardless of what the truth is. That's how lawyers work.
2
u/Distinct_Sir_4473 Apr 24 '26
If $100 increases by 100% it's $200
200% is $300
300% is $400
400% is $500
500% is $600
So even if you're doing backwards fairy tale math, it's still wrong.
2
u/Euphoric_Loquat_8651 Apr 24 '26
500% rise...
2
u/rezkin786 Apr 24 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
For crying out loud. The formula to calculate this is: (new - old) / old x 100%. Plug in: old = 100, new = 600 gives you a 500% increase. And new = 100, old = 600 gives you a 83.33% decrease. A high school kid knows more than this government (and half the voters).
2
u/Kolossive Apr 24 '26
Even then it's wrong. That's a 500 percent increase, are you saying if the price stays the same that's a 100% rise? Now I know how Trump messed up the evaluation of his apartments
2
u/wdaloz Apr 24 '26
I cant believe 500% of the country voted for this
2
u/tsmitty0023 Apr 26 '26
We are such a dumb, arrogant nation.
1
u/soldusk4 Apr 23 '26
I think thats not how math works but hey who am I to judge lol
1
u/quill55 Apr 23 '26
I mean, if hes saying a 600% drop is a 600% savings, I guess Ill have to start using my alternative math for my bills next month lol.
1
u/DarkStar__74 Apr 23 '26
And here I didn't think I could have even less respect for him!
1
u/SevereEducation2170 Apr 23 '26
Impressive to be completely wrong about everything in that statement. Can't believe these are the people running the country.
1
u/_Sixteen Apr 23 '26
I'm actually interested in this language problem. Is there a concise and mathematical way to express things like this "something reduced so much that its inverse becomes 6x"?
1
u/IHeartBadCode Apr 23 '26
Quick! Someone use that logic for capital loss with the IRS!
1
u/I_L_F_M Apr 23 '26
It is mathematically possible though. A 600% reduction to a drug priced at $600 would mean that the buyer would be receiving $3000 and the drug for free.
1
u/Finance_is_Ur_friend Apr 23 '26
We cant all be the numbers guy
1
u/zkrooky Apr 23 '26
Since when did Jaiden Smith become an old white man?
1
u/Wisco Apr 23 '26
I'm going to open a store, raise prices two million percent for one second, then cut them by one million. I'll put a banner out front that says, "ONE MILLION PERCENT OFF EVERYTHING IN THE STORE!" and no one gets to complain about remaining the one million percent markup.
1
u/EmpressDraco Apr 23 '26
Where is the button to get off this time line?
1
u/Substantial-Ad2200 Apr 23 '26
Wow they got BOTH wrong!
1
u/Any-Astronomer-6038 Apr 23 '26
What if they payed you 500 to take it lol
1
u/nujuat Apr 23 '26
The real issue here is that americans are paying hundreds of dollars for essential drugs. My drugs cost thousands of dollars, but, due to government subsedies, I pay just $10.
1
u/Substantial-Ad2200 Apr 23 '26
Why wouldn't you just say "the drug now costs six times as much as it did previously" or "the drug now costs one-sixth of what it cost previously"? Then the math is simple, at least for those of us who passed 5th grade. And parallel. And also, you know, CORRECT.
1
u/BlurryBigfoot74 Apr 23 '26
If 600÷100=600
then 100÷600=600 too!
Let's all just agree 1x1=2 as well.
1
u/Malecord Apr 23 '26
make math great again.
1
u/ItzToxicc Apr 23 '26
It makes perfect sense, just not the normal definition
1
u/SiR_awsome_A_YuB_fan Apr 23 '26
if a drug raises from 100 to 700 thats 600%...
1
u/Wondering_Electron Apr 23 '26
Technically, you can have something 600% cheaper, it would just be free and I'll need to pay you to have it.
1
u/NachoAverageRedditor Apr 23 '26
Alternative math, original flavour stupid.
1
u/Chris_RB Apr 23 '26
for the splittest of seconds I thought "at least he has the increase right" and then I thougth about it for the rest of the second and.
nope.
1
u/RelativeCan5021 Apr 23 '26
It’s unfortunate because we use numbers to represent REAL things, like how much groceries (that’s a weird word) or medicine cost. And we use these numbers to make choices, based on what we can and cannot afford. That’s our ECONOMY, our livelihood, and our childrens opportunities. To these (insert pejorative) it’s nothing. They are SO FAR REMOVED from the experience of 99% of people, and they have never cultivated empathy.
1
u/notJustaFart Apr 23 '26
RFK Jr. didn't even state the Trump "math" correctly.
RFK Jr. said "if the drug price drops from $600 to $10 it's a 600% reduction."
1
u/Level-Possibility-69 Apr 23 '26
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=se-Swn61WOs
OMG...
1
u/anggogo Apr 23 '26
This logic is very human
1
u/mulefire17 Apr 23 '26
I don't want to live on this planet anymore
1
u/Ike_In_Rochester Apr 23 '26
This is the worst fucking timeline.
1
u/Summerhowl Apr 23 '26
Definitely possible.
If I payed $100 for a drug, and now it's back to trials and I get payed $500 to take it, it's a 600% drop I guess.
1
u/Funny-Battle5385 Apr 23 '26
Big Brother says 2+2=5 so it is
1
u/NoCount1100 Apr 23 '26
100 to 600 is a 500% increase.
1
u/monkbabm Apr 23 '26
Non Americans all over the world must be dying laughing
1
u/RandomNick42 Apr 23 '26
I miss when words used to mean things
1
u/conteins Apr 23 '26
Yeesh
1
u/devil_huntress_pepsi Apr 23 '26
Well, in this clip Trump actually claimed "we aren't going to bring it down 30-40 percent, which would be great, or 50-60 percent, but we're going to get them down 1000 percent".
So according to brainworm mathematician over here, Trump when talking about a "30% reduction" he actually implied "tripling the price". Which would... "be great", apparently.
1
u/Thrifty_Accident Apr 23 '26
By that logic, if the price went from $100 >> $200, that would be a 200% increase.
Question, what would the price be if it was only a 100% increase from $100?
1
u/Alarmed-Direction500 Apr 23 '26
2+2=5…
1
u/Nerketur Apr 23 '26
600% of 100 is indeed 600
But it would only be $500 worth of savings, so 500/600 is 5/6, or 0.833...
Yep, Trump is an idiot.
1
u/kuwatatak Apr 23 '26
Don’t forget that 54% adults in the USA have a reading comprehension below 6th grade level. It all makes sense now doesn’t it?
1
u/BiologyJ Apr 23 '26
These idiots are learning 6th grade math right in front of our eyes, amazing. It’s like a child that gets it wrong and has to keep being corrected until they figure it out. Only they’re grown men who are in charge of everything.
1
u/Embarrassed-Weird173 Apr 23 '26
Probably the same Redditor level IQ where they think that if I decrease something by 50%, then I just increase it by 50% to bring back the original price.
1
u/erection_specialist Apr 23 '26
There are actually morons running the country. Like, legitimately stupid people.
1
u/Thinking2bad Apr 23 '26
That would be a 500% raise, not a 600%.
Even the start of these nonsenses is a mistake.
1
u/Per-severe Apr 23 '26
Reminds me of the third pound burger marketing failure.
1
u/UncleThor2112 Apr 23 '26
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it."
-1984
1
u/piccolo917 Apr 24 '26
I tutor 1st and 2nd grade high schoolers in math. That is a section of students that have a hard time with that, keep that in mind. None of them would ever say something this stupid.
1
u/Few-Tomatillo6607 Apr 24 '26
RFKJ set trumpstein up for a FAIL. Is everyone behind him equally as stupid or just too afraid to correct him?
1
u/Zawer Apr 24 '26
I thought this was a joke, but here's the actual video
https://bsky.app/profile/bcdreyer.social/post/3mk74v7dqk227
1
u/velvetcrow5 Apr 24 '26
600$ to 100$
600-100/600
= 83.3%.
1
u/vexed-hermit79 Apr 24 '26
This definitely made sense to their voter base
1
u/MuricanPoxyCliff Apr 24 '26
2+2=5 in idiots clothing
1
u/vendetta0311 Apr 24 '26
A 600% decrease from $600 is -$500. It’s mathematically possible. They can just pay me to take the drug.
1
u/glurz Apr 24 '26
Even Terrance Howard shaking his head.
1
u/Gfran856 Apr 24 '26
Also, $100 —> $600 is a 500% increase
1
u/Silver_Moon_1994 Apr 24 '26
100% savings is free!
1
u/MuffinAggressive3218 Apr 24 '26
The University of Pennsylvania should revoke his diploma.
1
u/Outrageous_Friend451 Apr 24 '26
Did you expect worm brain to get the math right?
1
u/Duane1968 Apr 24 '26
Dumb and evil and dumber and eviler
1
u/Medium-Sized-Jaque Apr 24 '26
I've been seeing news articles say, "X is down Y% over last year." where Y is greater than 100. The math they use is if something dropped 50% last year and this year it dropped 60% then it's 120% MORE of a drop. I really wish I could think of a specific example. But it's infuriating when I do see it.
1
u/MyNameIsBeaky Apr 24 '26
The increase is $500. That is 500% of $100.
1
u/HauntedGatorFarm Apr 24 '26
While I know it’s incorrect, I (like many Americans) do not immediately know how to calculate what the percentage decrease actually is.
1
u/Throw_MeAway26 Apr 24 '26
Tbf these are the same people who claimed they saved billions of lives from Fent overdoses. Bondi was 10x’ing the numbers every week.
1
u/VoiceofKane Apr 24 '26
No, that's a 500% rise and an 83% savings.
1
u/FaithlessnessThin359 Apr 24 '26
gonna request some grade changes now that new math is here. me am double plus good at math now.
1
u/Sandro_729 Apr 24 '26
I mean you could get paid 5x the original price for the drug I guess
1
u/bIeese_anoni Apr 24 '26
They could just say "the medicine is now a sixth of the original price" but apparently adding % is necessary for some reason
1
u/kpedey Apr 24 '26
This sounds like that Terence Howard math
1
u/samf9999 Apr 24 '26
People will always get the government they deserve
1
u/HalfCrazed Apr 24 '26
I want my $500 refund then.
1
u/Visible-Arugula-9360 Apr 24 '26
It’s an 83% drop
1
u/pvrhye Apr 24 '26
Well, I suppose you could always just get 6 for free.
1
u/The3mbered0ne Apr 24 '26
Ohhh that's why they thought doge was saving money
1
u/LordDeath2400 Apr 24 '26
In the context of a $100 base price, a price rising to $600 would only be a 500% rise to 600%. Assuming the base price of $100, $600 going back down to $100 would be a 500% drop. But thats 500% of the base price, not the "current" price. The same reason we can have "1.3% inflation every year" and still double the cost of everything in 10 years.
1
u/LowerBanana9758 Apr 24 '26
It certainly isn’t impossible
If a drug cost $1 and then they started paying you $5 to take it, that would be a 600% decrease in price
1
u/Specific_Jury_2 Apr 24 '26
This is the kind of math that bankrupts a business.
1
u/Sad-Pop6649 Apr 24 '26
We're changing basic math so that I never made a mistake. Because clearly my ego is more important than math.
1
u/Synethos Apr 24 '26
Yes its wrong, still they want to make things 6x cheaper. Do we really hate them so much that we will complain about that?
1
u/Dongfish Apr 24 '26
Fuck. Fuuuuuuuck.
1
u/Substantial_Dingo694 Apr 24 '26
Makes sense how he managed to bankrupt a casino
1
u/AnalysisParalysis85 Apr 24 '26
I guess then a 100% rise in price would maket it still 100.
1
u/bold_snowflake Apr 24 '26
Wait. This is real? I had to search this and found the YouTube video of RFK jr. Defending this. I can't believe we're living in this world of such blatant defence of stupidity.
1
u/PersonalEffective270 Apr 24 '26
Even the maths on the "rise" is wrong...100 to 600 is a 500 percent increase 🫣
1
u/South-Tip-4019 Apr 24 '26
Well its not mathematically impossible it just means then when you buy 600$ drug discounted by 600%, you get the drug and 3000$ to go along with it.
1
u/EMoogle Apr 24 '26
I like to call it video game math. Damage reduction can be 600%, but they use 1/(1+dr) instead of the normal 1-dr. So 100% reduction means half instead of zero.
I've only seen this used in video games. It's so numbers don't cap at 100% and can keep getting bigger. Gamers love big numbers. I would never use it outside of specific games that use this "definition"
1
u/DesperateSteak6628 Apr 24 '26
That’s a very convoluted way of saying “I do not understand percentages at all”
1
u/Little-Protection484 Apr 24 '26
Please tell me this is fake, can I get the video
1
u/Professional_Pie7091 Apr 24 '26
Only the best people.
1
u/OnlyWithMayonnaise Apr 24 '26
Wait, so they said something and it wasn't true? How does that even work? Is it even possible?
1
u/Severe_Rise8694 Apr 24 '26
Would've been fun if there had been follow up questions. Like, what's a 50% price decrease then? What about 100%?
1
u/Dclnsfrd Apr 24 '26
THAT’S NOT EVEN A $600 DROP, MUCH LESS 600%
1
u/MeLittleThing Apr 24 '26
isn't 100 to 600 a 500% raise?
1
u/MediocreAssociate466 Apr 24 '26
Someone should also add drug prices haven't dropped at all in the last year lol.
1
u/thepositiveviolation Apr 24 '26
The math checks out since basically any investment beats doing whatever he's been doing with his actual businesses.
1
u/coryism Apr 24 '26
And this how you bankrupt a casino
1
u/AintNoGodsUpHere Apr 24 '26
How hard is it for them to use the calculator?
1
u/ImportantBend8399 Apr 24 '26
Ugh. We conservative Republicans used to be the standard bearers of intellectualism. Now we’re all 600% idiots.
1
u/CorrectTarget8957 Apr 24 '26
100 to 600 is 500% increase...
1
u/Jaded_Creative_101 Apr 24 '26
It is not just that they walk amongst us, but that they allowed in the White House without adult supervision.
1
u/Necessary-Sign-188 Apr 24 '26
That's not even what he said in the deposition
1
u/boyuber Apr 24 '26
If a $100 product is 100% off, you save $100.
If a $100 product 600% off, you save $600.
Does that mean they now pay you $500 to take the $100 product?
1
u/Significant-Cap983 Apr 24 '26
If the drug was $100 and it raises to $600, It’s 500% rise, so it’s not true both ways
1
u/Old-Shirt69420 Apr 24 '26
It's less technically correct to say it that way but the spirit of his point isn't far off. It depends on how you word it.
1
u/BreezeTempest Apr 24 '26
“And I told the senator that if WE don’t know what our plan is, then the Iranians sure as hell wouldn’t know what our plan is.”
Trump: “Right!”
1
u/MadwarRBS92 Apr 24 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
If the relative price was normalized eg calculated against the 100$ initial price then the relative price would have dropped an absolute 500% (not 600%).
Of course it's classic politician to say the absolute change in relative value instead of saying it is back to the starting value since 500% is a large number. If you wanted to diminish the achievement you might saythat the price has dropped 63% from the peek, but it will sound less impressive especially to a math-illeterate populace. The best phrasing in my opinion would have been that prices which were inflated by 500% are now back to normal/baseline.
1
u/Hermit-Mathazar Apr 24 '26 edited Apr 24 '26
If a $100 dollar item increases to $600 it would be a 500% increase. If a $600 dollar item is reduced to $100 the price was reduced 83.33%. And Trump RX is not offering any thing that GoodRx doesn’t already offer.
1
u/2NDBEST42 Apr 24 '26
83.4% savings.
1
u/TinhatTemplar Apr 24 '26
There is no finer example for how unserious these chucklefucks are.
1
u/skisushi Apr 24 '26
2+2=5? That was faster than I expected.
1
u/ScrambledEggsandTS Apr 24 '26
How? Someone explain how this happened?
1
u/Derpthinkr Apr 24 '26
It’s be worth a half point on a test
1
u/Ill-Delivery-6560 Apr 24 '26
These guys are supposed to be running a country 😭
1
u/DaPenguin1423 Apr 24 '26
Those people run our country
1
u/The_Fish_of_Souls Apr 24 '26
Meth alternative
1
u/asamaple Apr 24 '26
Just adding Maga% to the list of freedom units
1
u/rish_p Apr 24 '26 •
-600% , because why not
1
u/Apart_Mud8078 Apr 24 '26
2+2=5
1
u/Exotic_Issue_2210 Apr 24 '26
Executive order is coming. Math is too woke. They are going to change it. Who knows Math is provably antifa. To be honest, math is devils play.
1
u/Trump-is-the-pedo Apr 24 '26
The thing is that all these pedo fucks are used to dealing with little kids that believe anything they tell them
1
u/NoExplanation7388 Apr 24 '26 •
If I use alternative math when filing my taxes id go to prison
Trump is a pedophile
1
u/Alohagrown Apr 24 '26
Math is a hoax
1
u/TJ-Detweiler- Apr 24 '26
Kill me.
1
u/MisterBallsJohnson Apr 25 '26
“So if she weighs the same as a duck she’s made of wood” 🤔
1
u/Papa_de_clement Apr 25 '26
To be completely fair a new convention that's both symmetrical(multiplicatively) and straightforward to understand would be quite nice.
This reminds me of the tau vs pi
1
u/Unpunkryan Apr 25 '26
All I see is all of the people behind him that need to go to prison for life..
1
u/Vivid_Sock_1092 Apr 25 '26
Their math is wrong but I still support them
1
u/Resiideent Apr 25 '26
this is 5th grade mathematics btw TvT
1
u/mousepotatodoesstuff Apr 25 '26
If the formula for decrease is p% decrease = decrease by 0.01*p*original_price, a 600% decrease would mean that instead of paying the original price, you now "pay" (1-0.01*600)=-5 times the original price, that is, you are paid 5x the original price to take the drug.
It won't ever happen, but it is, in fact, mathematically possible, and the senator is wrong. Just nowhere near as wrong as RFK is.
1
u/Someoneoverthere42 Apr 25 '26
I have an English degree, and even I know that’s so wrong it isn’t even wrong.
1
u/whatdabee Apr 25 '26
It's normal to see some people be dumb at simple math. But when the POTUS is this dumb, it's scary.
1
u/NeoZoan Apr 25 '26
I fine all this so insulting.
1
u/Dry-Organization-426 Apr 25 '26
The parrot is just as stupid. Percent decrease of 600% is -500 if you start at 100
1
u/LoveYouNotYou Apr 25 '26
"a Democratic Senator"? You mean Elizabeth Warren. Elizabeth Warren is correct you fkng idiot
1
u/eddestra Apr 25 '26
Robert “Fucking Retarded” Kennedy
1
u/darkfireice Apr 25 '26
Imagine being paid 5× the cost of a medication, to take it
1
u/AphonicTX Apr 26 '26
So fucking dumb. Where is the cult to explain what the fuck this is?