math

Reader comment on: The Times, the Dollar, and the Renminbi

Submitted by John Gillis (United States), Aug 11, 2011 17:20

Something is amiss with the mathematics of the claim of 333% increase of the cost of the Times from 1999 to 2009. At 60 cents, a 100% increase would be $1.20. A 200% increase would be $1.80. So, how does one leap to 333% for the extra 20 cents up to $2.00?

The TImes increases are way bad enough at 233% over a 10 year period, so I think your point still works fine with the correct math.

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.

The Future of Capitalism replies:

Thanks for the catch. Corrected now to reflect my typo — it is a 233% increase, or 1.40, which is the amount of the increase, divided by .60, the original price.

Other reader comments on this item

Title By Date
Currency manipulation vs. trade deficit [127 words]nerdbertAug 12, 2011 03:23
⇒ math
[w/response] [78 words]		John GillisAug 11, 2011 17:20

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to math by John Gillis

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Comments are moderated by the editor and are subject to editing.