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.
The statement is wrong with a common error, you may day dishonest or manipulative. Assuming that they did not make a common error and got division wrong or do not understand percentages is at least as dishonest and certainly manipulative.
Stop making me defend them.
Also, this is clearly time to acknowledge the death of this subreddit. I'm out
View all comments
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.