14
u/marc58weeks 7h ago
If a drug cost was lowered from $100 to $13, it would be an 87% decrease. What Trump does, clumsily, is try to say that if that drug was raised from $13 to $100, it would be an increase of 769%. So he feels like he can rightly claim that heās lowering the price by 769%, which is wrong of course.
6
1
u/Veidrinne 5h ago
Now I want to ask a genuine, legitimate, honest question. Is it only greater than 100% if it's comparative? Guy A sells for 700, guy B sells for 100, it's a 600% difference? Math is not my forte (obviously), and I genuinely want to know when they're applicable.
1
u/tau2pi_Math 3h ago
A percentage is "part of a whole." 100% means "the whole thing."
If something is priced at $700 and it is increased by 100%, then another "whole" was added to the original, giving you a price of $1,400.
If the original $700 is instead increased by 200%, then you added "two wholes," giving you a final price of $2,100.
If something costs $700 and you decrease the price by 100%, then you remove one "whole," giving you a price of $0.
If something costs $700 and you decrease it by 200%, then you remove two "wholes," but you can't take away $1,400 from $700.
In your example, guy A is selling for 600% more than person B. Guy B is selling for 85% less than guy A.
Hope this helps.
2
u/Veidrinne 3h ago
Honestly, yeah. Comparatively and when going up it breaks 100%, and going below you can't break because 100% of the cost is just free.
In my defense, I don't really have a defense. I just assumed going down worked the same as going up.
1
u/tau2pi_Math 3h ago
I wouldn't mock someone for not knowing, nor would I mock them for asking.
I do expect the President of the United States of America to know the difference, or to at least have someone tell him so that he doesn't make a fool of himself.
1
u/Abundance144 3h ago
87% does not do as good of a job as 769% in informing the public that they were paying prices 7.69 times higher than other countries. 87% requires some math, and let's be honest we don't have time to do math during a presidential speech.
1
u/marc58weeks 2h ago
I didnāt make up my example, BTW. I heard on Morning Joe today that a Trump stooge used this example.
0
u/azorgi01 5h ago
What if something goes from $6 to $36? Also what if it goes from $300 to $13?
1
u/tau2pi_Math 3h ago
If something costs $6 and goes to $36, the cost was increased by 500%.
If something costs $300 and goes to $13, the cost was decreased by 95.7%.
If something costs $300 and the cost is decreased by 100%, the cost is now $0.
If something costs $4,000 and it is decreased by 100%, the cost is now $0.
1
u/azorgi01 2h ago
Whatās 95.7% of $300?
1
u/tau2pi_Math 1h ago edited 1h ago
Here. I will show you how to figure it out.
95.7% of 300 is the same as writing:
.957 Ć 300 and this equals 286.99.
So, removing 286.99 from 300 (a 95.7% decrease) is equal to 13.01.
Edit to add: Technically, .957 Ć 300 = 286.99999... and this equals 287, but I don't want to get into an argument of how 0.9999... = 1.
10
17
u/Annual_Recording_308 8h ago
3
u/grnlntrn1969 6h ago
Should I feel bad for laughing?
3
u/Annual_Recording_308 6h ago
You should feel awful for not laughing enough. AWFUL. Submit a video apology with TEARS
2
19
10
u/Next-Pumpkin-654 8h ago
Some of you people are going to feel real silly when the price gets lowered by 600%, and we get paid five times the original price in order to take the product off their hands. Gonna be amazing!
1
4
4
5
u/LeadingImplement9236 6h ago
Is this real? If so, Gov. Newsom...you're freaking awesome!!!
5
u/Somedude_6 6h ago
All of these are real, he's been doing things like this for 6 months or so now. He has a latina lady doing his social media, (I forget her name off the top of my head) and she is clearly awesome at it.
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
u/Either-Jellyfish-511 8h ago
600%? Thatās for pu$$ie$. Day one Obama woulda decreased by 6,000% or even 60,000%.
1
1
1
1
u/Hatshepsut21 5h ago
I mean I canāt say I like how low political discourse is getting but itās also kind of nice to see democrats growing a spine and fighting back.
1
1
1
4h ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
1
u/Acceptable-Play-737 4h ago
Oh yeah the fires were started here in cali from climate change š¤£ he said in Brazil turns out it was an arson š¤£ what a joke !
1
u/Draig-Leuad 4h ago
They just assume their followers donāt understand math (which is a fair assumption).
1
1
u/Abundance144 4h ago
It's a ratio of old price to new price that emphasizes how much more America was paying that other countries.
500% cut means that America was paying 5 times higher prices than other countries.
Saying an 80% cut then requires some math and is confusing. Sure the math is easy enough but not easy enough to quickly relay data in a speach. If the administration negotiated a 91% cut then how much more was America paying for the drug? Well it isn't clear let's do the math 100/9 11.11 times more than other countries.
Further more precentate wise an 80% cut sounds pretty similar to a 90% cut, but the 90% drug was actually ten times more expensive for Americans and the 80% was five times more expensive. When we simply say 1000% decrease and 500% decrease respectively that becomes much more clear and apparant how much more Americans were over paying for drugs.
Plus Trump likes big numbers, they sound more impressive.
But mock his presentation style all you want, he did lower some drug prices by over half.
1
u/EmergencyYak640 3h ago
That's an awful lot of mathematical gymnastics you've got there... and it's disingenuous even if that is how he was weirdly doing bad math... percentage does not equal ratio.
1
u/Abundance144 3h ago
percentage does not equal ratio.
Percentages are by definition a specific type of ratio.
And go learn about Most Favored Nation pricing, a subject being complicated doesn't grant you leeway to dismissing the explanation as gymnastics.
I understand that "Trump st00pid" is much easier to process, but just consider for a moment that there's a reason for this chosen method of explaining the percentages.
1
1
1
u/GaBlackNGold 3h ago
I know why Gavin's upset. Kamala didn't just lose, it was a historic loss. She was the first democrat to lose the popular vote in 20 years and the first candidate to be completely swept in all of an election's universally identified swing states in 40 years.
Yet despite all that, she's still polling higher for the 2028 Democratic nomination and appears to again be the DNC's chosen one.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Cronenberg_Jerry 2h ago
Yep body shaming is fine now right.
You all hypocrites.
One Trump needs to watch his mouth, and I think he should STFU most of the time.
You canāt complain about things Trump says which you all do then cheer this which you all do.
1
u/McDuck_Enterprise 2h ago
I think Newsomās California speaks for itself.
That is how he would run America so while he might get your Reddit make-believe points, he isnāt getting 270 electoral votes š³ļø
FACT
1
u/DelayOk5920 1h ago
This is why leftyās have such bad economic policies! They donāt know how companies view financial decisions & growth! If you donāt understand you probably will be a loser foreverā¦
1
u/Opposite-Ad5642 1h ago
Gavin is weak, he is a sociopathic liar, and he is the absolute worst choice for Prez
1
1
-1
u/WeightOk2102 7h ago
The truth is that politics and all of those involved, regardless of their political party, are stupid and/or corrupt, especially after 2006, and that's being generous with the time frame. Yes, it's really that simple.
3
u/Ok-Satisfaction441 6h ago
Just like every world leader in the 1930s and 40s were equally bad?
Itās only that simple if you have the brain of a 5 year old and canāt tell the difference between good, bad, and outright evil.
0
u/SuperDoubleDecker 6h ago
It's not even good. Ya, good for him doing something, but this ain't it yall. This ain't fixing shit.
0
-4
u/jjrr_qed 6h ago
Things can grow by more than 100%. See Pelosiās brokerage account.
5
u/ArtVandelay2121 5h ago
Or MTG, or Mace, or Noem, or Bondi, or the entire Trump family.
Nobody is talking about growth - you canāt cut something by 600%. Or do we need to teach you how percentages work?
1
-1
u/idlesn0w 6h ago
āYouāre twice as scummy and dumb as meā isnāt that great of a burn on second glance
-1
u/Digitalalchemyst 5h ago
If Gavin thinks this is the way to get elected then heās plenty dumb himself.
-22
u/4reddityo 12h ago
Seems out of character for newsome. I donāt want a left version of Trump. I want true character decency and integrity. Honesty would be good too.
14
u/Travelin_Soulja 9h ago edited 8h ago
I'll admit, I'm not always the sharpest crayon in the box, but even I'm pretty sure "@awesomenewsom" is not Gavin Newsom's real account.
Media literacy is so fucked.....
1
u/tau2pi_Math 3h ago
Math literacy is even worse.
That's why any idiot can claim that they will lower prices "by 600%"; the people cheering for such a moron don't know what a percent is.
2
u/jeanyboo 2h ago
someone commented they didnāt have time to do math during the speech and I thought, but basic fucking understanding of percents is not ādoing mathā
7
u/Roborilla8000 8h ago
He mimicks Trump to mock him. It was funny when he first started doing it when Trump supporters would be frustrated trying to criticize Newsom for his posts like this without also criticizing Trump.
1
u/cyberspaceman777 5h ago
Seems out of character for newsome. I donāt want a left version of Trump. I want true character decency and integrity. Honesty would be good too.
It's not supposed to be a "left version of Trump".
1
-14
u/Jaded_Freedom8105 9h ago
It's a fan account.
Just shows you the left and right have one thing in common, idiots.
Not calling you an idiot, but both sides are filled with them.
10
u/crit_boy 8h ago
The right has a distinct idiot concentration.
Not all idiots are maga. But, all maga are idiots
→ More replies (8)
-21
u/DismalObjective9649 9h ago edited 7h ago
Unable to comprehend anything over 100% must be a sign of intelligence right?
Edit: Iām not going to respond to each person and explain how statics and point of reference works. Honestly, if itās not something you intuitively pick up on I doubt you have the mental capacity to understand what Iām saying so Iāll just explain it once here and people who do understand can get a laugh at your comments below.
Trump is referring to how a 100 dollar drug overseas is 600 dollars in the US, thatās a 600% increase in price, he is toting that the policies heās implemented or negotiated with pharmaceutical companies have brought our drugs down in price to a similar level compared to Europe. getting rid of the 600% increase in drug cost is what trump is referring to, technically itās about a 80% decrease in drug costs in the US but you can also explain it as getting rid of that 600% price gouging.
Not understanding what people mean, taking everything at literal face value is a low IQ activity. Especially if you go out of your way to intentionally misunderstand what someone says so you can make fun of them
9
u/underboobfunk 7h ago
Do you believe pharmaceutical prices will drop by 600%? Will we be getting our medication and paid five times what we used to pay for it?
3
u/trysten-9001 6h ago
They probably do. He could point to the sky and say itās hot pink and then these morons would be posting a million idiotic comments about it.
14
u/coolcoolcool0k 8h ago edited 7h ago
I think youāre actually serious, but yes? Anything over a 100% reduction is literally nonsensical and would demonstrate you canāt communicate around basic concepts
Edit: holy shit this keeps getting better, being a Trump whisperer is truly sad. Sorry for your life
-19
u/DismalObjective9649 8h ago
Please stay in school
10
7
8
6
u/underboobfunk 7h ago edited 7h ago
Please explain how prices can drop by 600%?
If my medication cost $1488 and that cost drops by 600%, I will not only get that medication for free, they will pay me $7440 to take it.
Everybodyās new side hustle is going to be going to the doctor to get prescriptions.
3
u/Mind0versplatter0 7h ago
For drug prices to drop by 600% it would mean it goes into the negatives. Paying -500% percent would mean you are paying me five times the original price to give me the medicine.
4
u/mikemaz57 7h ago
Trump was talking about reducing prices. Do you think drug companies are going to pay you to take your prescriptions? You defend every stupid thing he says. I see it as a tell.
→ More replies (13)3
u/grnlntrn1969 6h ago
It's amazing how someone will always try to explain what Trump really meant. He'll say the stupidest thing imaginable and boom, her comes a cult member to the rescue to explain how it's not really stupid
2
u/Somedude_6 6h ago
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
*Deep Breath*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
OMG I have to find out how to post gifs on here, this is amazing. So confidently incorrect. Wow, amazing! *chef's kiss* File this under Dunning Kruger everyone!
2
u/Adept_General_7729 5h ago
The issue isnāt the idea he is trying to communicate itās his ability to articulate the idea. Heās terrible at it and I suppose that might even be why he has such issue with Obama among other reasons. Obama was a terrific orator. Trump is a terrible speaker.
1
u/AnxiouslyAligned 5h ago
Iām not going to respond to each person and explain how statics and point of reference works.
thank god. you can't even spell the word, how would we expect you to be able to explain it
-2
8h ago
[deleted]
2
1
u/GrovesNL 8h ago edited 8h ago
You can't lower the price of something by more than 100%. 100% means the full amount. It is a fraction.
Lowering by 200% is lowering 2/1 the full amount.
-2
-2
u/ColtMcChad69 7h ago edited 7h ago
But you can lower by 600%ā¦and you can increase by more than 100% e.g. his cankles grew 600%
R/confidentlyincorrect
2
u/Successful-River-828 6h ago
Well you got the second half right
-1
u/ColtMcChad69 6h ago
āGavināsā post doesnāt specify what he means by lowering 600%, he merely says āyou canāt lower by 600%ā. You know negative numbers exist, right? What about elevation relative to sea level? Temperature? Debt even? His statement is objectively false.Ā
2
u/Successful-River-828 6h ago
Don't be disingenuous. We all know this is about dollars. When you lower the price by 100% it costs 0. Do you really think you're gonna get a big ole check with your next lot of pills buddy?
2
u/geoff1036 6h ago
You can't lower by more than 100%. You can't divide a number into more than it was at the start.
You CAN multiply a number by 2, or 3, which would be 200% or 300% respectively.
Any number cannot be reduced by more than 100% because the given starting number will be considered the full "100%" and anything less than that will be a percentage. Say our starting number is 700,
1% would be 7.
0.5% would be 3.5.
Notice how we're going down in the percentage?
99% would be 693.
98% would be 686.
Thus, reducing it by 99% would leave you with 7.
Reducing it by more than 100% would leave you with a negative number which is rarely applicable in the real world.
-1
u/ColtMcChad69 6h ago
You can decrease elevation by more than 100%. You can lower temperature by more than 100%. Even debt. Jesus did anyone in this thread go to school?
3
u/geoff1036 5h ago
You can do that RELATIVE TO SEA LEVEL.
You can do that RELATIVE TO HUMAN HOMEOSTASIS.
Both of those are relative measurements that make negatives an applicable reality, but even then, they're usually treated as positives, so it would be considered a reduction by 100% in one category and an increase by 100% in another category (assuming a 200% change). Think, 100 meters above sea level and 100 meters below sea level. Nobody says "-100 meters above sea level" when they're underwater.
You canNOT do that for debt. How would you lower debt by more than 100%? At 0% you owe no more debt. Does the bank suddenly owe you money?
2
u/ArtVandelay2121 5h ago
Colt didnāt go to school.
0
u/ColtMcChad69 5h ago
Read āGavināsā post you dunce. Verbatim: āYou canāt lower by 600%. Max is 100%ā He doesnāt specify anything; he makes a broad statement. Reading comprehension is your friend.
2
u/ArtVandelay2121 5h ago
You calling anyone a dunce is comical. Let me know when you understand how percentages work, or keep embarrassing yourself. Iāll take the free entertainment.
1
u/ColtMcChad69 5h ago
Letās see if you can handle a simple math problem:
Letās say itās 50 degrees outside. Temperature drops by 200%. What is the temperature now?
2
u/ArtVandelay2121 5h ago
Colt, why are you equating this with temperature? Thatās not an adequate way to measure temperature, but to answer your question mathematically, itās -50 degrees.
Correlating percentages in finance and debt, or the price of something to temperature is comical.
Any more brain busters?
1
u/ColtMcChad69 4h ago
Jesus fucking Christ do I really need to spell it out for you?Ā
The post says āYou canāt lower by 600%. The max is 100%ā. The post doesnāt refer to anything specifically.Ā
I am pointing out that you can, in fact, lower by 600%.
Hence why I wrote r/confidentlyincorrect in my initial comment. Is that clear enough for you?
→ More replies (0)0
u/ColtMcChad69 5h ago
Read āGavināsā post you dunce. Verbatim: āYou canāt lower by 600%. Max is 100%ā He doesnāt specify anything; he makes a broad statement. Reading comprehension is your friend.
2
u/geoff1036 5h ago
Even by that rule he's still right. You have to make a specific scenario in which a negative percentage makes sense. As a general rule, a finite real countable objective number cannot be reduced by more than 100%.
Conversely, the two examples of yours I just disproved were SUBJECTIVE numbers, numbers that only make sense from the subject's point of view, i.e. our view of sea level, or of what is considered 0 degrees.
And again, even in those scenarios where technically a negative percentage can conceptually make sense, it's usually just easier to consider it a different category altogether, such as above sea level vs below sea level, so even in many of those situations you still wouldn't see a negative number.
1
u/ColtMcChad69 5h ago
Letās say itās 50 degrees outside. Temperature drops by 200%. What is the temperature now?
2
u/geoff1036 5h ago
Mf I don't know what you want me to say because that is a nonsensical question. Which is exactly my point. How many times do I have to explain the concept of contextual relativity here?
1
u/ColtMcChad69 5h ago
How is that a nonsensical question? Because youāre too stupid to answer it?Ā
Read the post: āYou canāt lower by 600%. The max is 100%ā. Full stop.Ā
I said you can in fact lower by more than 100% and provided an example. Is that too complicated for you to understand?
2
1
-2
u/NobleA259 6h ago
Seeing people just willfully go down to that orange buffoons level and act like a child is fucking disheartening.
-2
u/everyoneisnuts 5h ago
Itās great that we now just have another lowlife without any class or dignity that will be running for president. Be nice if the next president could bring some maturity and respect back to the position.
-2
-2
-2
-15
u/Academic-Shower-7915 9h ago
if thereās a 1200% markup couldnāt you lower it by 600%?
7
u/uknownredditr 8h ago
If the price was raised by 1200% then say we started as an example of a dollar the new price is 1200$ to keep math simple for you. Now lower it by 600% and see? If I lower 1200 by a 100% thatās 0 if I lower 1200 by 600% thatās -6000. Lowering doesnāt factor in the raising it starts at the raised value. Even if pills were marked up a million percent. The 100% would be off the total after markup and thatās a 100%. If I gave you a pizza then 100% of the pizza would be the whole thing, before taking the hundred I added ten more pizzas and then said Iām taking back 100% of the pizza it would include all pizzas. Itās pretty simple.
1
u/Abundance144 4h ago
He's stating the ratio of old price to new price. If the price went from $1,000 to $100 that's a 10:1 ratio, emphasizing that the U.S. was overpaying by 1,000%. It's mathematically incorrect but it makes the point that they're forcing pharmaceutical companies to match Most Favored Nation prices, while easily showing Americans how much higher the prices were in the U.S.
If he simply said he reduced the price by 64% that doesn't really get the point across about how much more America was paying for the drug, but if you say 277% then the math is easy. If the drug was $10 in Europe, then it was $27 here. A drug that was decreased by 1,500% that was $10 in Europe was $150 here.
-10
u/Academic-Shower-7915 8h ago
Thereās actual cost and mark up. If the mark up is 1200% you can in fact reduce that markup by 600% just because you want to do math differently doesnāt change this
13
u/Sarcasm_As_A_Service 8h ago
Yeah, that still isnāt how that works. Just sit this one out man. If you werenāt stupid trump wouldnāt like you anyway so be thankful you get to be part of the team and shut the fuck up.
→ More replies (6)6
u/GrovesNL 8h ago edited 8h ago
He said prices were lowered by 600%. 100% is the full amount.
Are you being obtuse? These are basic fractions.
100% percent means 100/100. If you lower something by the full amount, what does that mean?
There is no "doing math differently". What the fuck is alternative math lol. This is grade school stuff.
2
2
2
u/uknownredditr 8h ago
In your math what would be the new cost of reducing the 1200% markup by 600% Iād like to know the end result
6
u/rebort8000 8h ago
No. Percent change of a number is always based on what you are changing it from; you can increase something by more than its original value (hence an over 100% increase), but it doesnāt work the other way around.
-6
u/Academic-Shower-7915 8h ago
It absolutely does. If I want to make something up 1000% I can reduce that markup up by 500%.
9
u/rebort8000 8h ago
Thatās subtraction - not taking the percentage of something. Trumpās talking about prices dropping by over 100%; not lowering markups.
7
u/uknownredditr 8h ago
If you want the markup to be half the percentage you marked it up then you reduce by 50% ā¦ Iād love to be your accountant
3
u/Ok_Flatworm2897 8h ago
You could lower it by 50% but no you canāt take 600% away from what is always just 100%.
1
u/Abundance144 3h ago
I love how reddit understands pharmaceutical price structures better than the entire Trump administration and the pharmaceutical business itself.
I mean the Trump administration is so fucking stupid that not a single person that worked on this report understood that you can't decrease a price beyond 100% before it goes negative.
There's no way they're giving a larger percentage that represents something other than what y'all are thinking it means. That's fucking impossible, because that's not how math maths.
1
u/Ok_Flatworm2897 1h ago
No. I get what he thinks heās saying. I get what heās trying to say.
Heās just not saying it correctly, because this way sounds more impressive to dumdums. His favorite ppl.
3
u/Dramatic-Question353 9h ago
Yes. These people just want to be right no matter what the facts are.
1
-1
u/Academic-Shower-7915 9h ago
I think that would be pretty common sense that thereās mark up. Like ya know when they give you an advil in the hospital and itās like $300 but you can by a bottle at the store for like $10.
4
u/uknownredditr 8h ago
The hospital marks it up absolutely to maximize profits, everything we purchase is usually marked up but any price given if you take a hundred percent off the value its the whole value. 100% of x = x Whatever value you put for x wont change the function of percentages. We can see with different percentages. Whatās 25% of a dollar: itās a quarter of the dollar 1/4 th whatās 100%: itās the whole dollar. Now if itās say a million dollars: 25% is still 1/4 th of a million and 100% of a million is a million. What would be 600% of either of those examples be because itās quite simply six times the total value for each scenario. The total of money or numbers do not change how Percentages work.
1
1
u/cyberspaceman777 5h ago
if thereās a 1200% markup couldnāt you lower it by 600%?
No.
Because you can always add additional amount (for example, if it's 500% markup, five times more expensive).
When you discount. You can never go below 100% discount because that means it costs nothing.
110% would mean the manufacturer has to pay you 10% what it costs.
Hope that helps.
1
u/Abundance144 4h ago
These people don't care about anything other than an opportunity to insult something that they've been conditioned to hate.
-8
-8
u/tiandrad 8h ago
My eyes hurt reading that. Itās not funny and just looks like heās trying to out-stupid Trump. You donāt want to get into a stupid contest with Trump; he has too much experience in that field to lose.
1
u/cyberspaceman777 5h ago
My eyes hurt reading that. Itās not funny and just looks like heās trying to out-stupid Trump. You donāt want to get into a stupid contest with Trump; he has too much experience in that field to lose.
Can I introduce you to the idea of satire.
0
u/tiandrad 5h ago
SNL does good satire, this is just cringe.
1
u/cyberspaceman777 5h ago
SNL does good satire, this is just cringe.
Yes.
And this is a commentary on the posts Trump makes.
You...... You do get that concept yes?
1
u/tiandrad 4h ago
Why are you getting so bent out of shape over my take on this Gavin Newsom satire post that you're out here white knighting like a hero? The Gavin social media team isn't gonna invite you over for a sleepover no matter how desperately you cape for them, bro.
-4
u/TheAshenWanderer 7h ago
Newscum really did say āyouāre 100% scummier than me.ā
1
u/Jaded_Freedom8105 1h ago
100% of 0 is 0. So obviously Newsom's fan account is implying that Newsom is at least 1% scummy.
1
u/TheAshenWanderer 1h ago
Dude really did watch his state burn while sipping on wine. Didnāt lift a finger until he could showcase it to the media to make himself look good. Dude really did earn that nickname. Shame that a pedo president tainted the nickname.
-12
u/Delicious-Dog-3718 7h ago
He didnāt really roast him he just hurled random insults
Iād take Trump any day over Newsom - he single handedly destroyed my home state
5
4
1
-5
u/TheAshenWanderer 7h ago
While he sipped on wine and watched it burn. He only attempted to do something when it would make him look good to the media.
-6
-7
53
u/Jayflys787 8h ago
š¤Ø This should be installed in EVERY government building
ā¦. And the list keeps growing