Comment by tmoertel
3 days ago
Regarding this error:
> like repeating they decreased drugs price by 600%
The NYT and other media outlets like to point out that this claim is mathematically impossible. However, “cut prices by 600%” is understood perfectly well by most people (but not pedants) to mean “we undid price hikes of 600%.”
I suspect that this phrasing was chosen as a “wedge” to drive home to the MAGA faithful that the news media is biased against them.
Does that logic apply only when the claimed cut is over 100%?
If I advertise that my store "cut prices by 50%" but the prices are actually only 33% lower (which is the same as undoing a 50% price hike), would it be pedantic to call me out on my bullshit?
> Does that logic apply only when the claimed cut is over 100%?
Yes, I’d say.
It’s the same as the informal usage of “X times smaller” to describe scaling by 1/X. The idiom generally isn’t used unless X > 1. (The exception might be when several values of X are reported together. Then one might say “0.74 times smaller” to maintain parallel form with nearby “4 times smaller” and similar claims.)
You ignored the 2nd part of their message, imagine this:
> We cut prices by 50%! Before $30, now $20
Would it be pedantic to call that price cut bullshit?
6 replies →