How good is the education in your country?

Or if you're American: How good was your hometown's education

I went to one of the best public schools in my state. Google, "Hinsdale Central High School."

I went to one of the best public schools in my state. Google, "Hinsdale Central High School."

I went to one of the best public schools in my state. Google, "Hinsdale Central High School."

Fui a una de las mejores escuelas públicas de mi estado. Google, "Hinsdale Central High School".

public schools in my state. Google, "Hinsdale Central High School."

"b"

130

Well it would be 100 bucks. 70 worth of goods and 30 bucks cash.

How much did the owner pay for said item he sold?

This

I went to a middle tier public high school. "Hinsdale Central High School."

I went to one of the best public schools in my state. Google, "Hinsdale Central High School."

seeing how our education is politically cucked by Jews. I'd give it an F grade. back when I was in school it wasn't as bad though

What is this new copy pasta?
And why this school have the devil in the fucking logo?

Retard alert

After I take him to court: -15,000 CF

He lost $200. Stole $100, lost $70 worth of goods, and gave $30 back.

I went to one of the best public schools in my state. Google, "Hinsdale Central High School."

God you're dumb. He gave $70 of it back to the shop owner.

Its silly the way they set it up though. If you sold 70 dollars worth of goods for 70 dollars you wouldn't make any money. The goods would most likely be worth less than that amount.

he lost the cost of the goods + 30 dollars and had his markup returned

$100

Still, it's $70 goods because that's how much he would have gotten for it, if it wasn't stolen

But he lost $70 worth of goods and received no payment other than what he should actually have. He lost $200.

I went to one of the best public schools in my state. Google, "Hinsdale Central High School."

if COG was $50 and his gross profit was $20, storekeeper still lost cog +gross on those items

therefore still lost the initial 100, plus the change, plus COG and the gross on the items

why is this hard?

This. The question is incomplete.

They didnt ask for how much they lost in goods + money, just money. Try again smartass nigger

actually is right

You lost 100
Get back 70 but lost 70 in goods so you still lost 100
and lost 30 more so is 130

This is a good meme

I'm just going to assume you're taking the piss and can't be this dumb. He got 70 of his dollars back. He lost 30 dollars and the merchandise.

$100 taken from the register

-100

Total = -100

Thief gives back $100

+100

Total = 0

Store owner gives thief $70 worth of goods, and $30 cash
-70
-30

Total = -100

America Strong

Wrong.

Here's the correct math

-100 Dollars
-70 Dollars in Goods
-30 Dollars in returned money

100+70+30 = 200.

He lost 200 money

The shop owner would have eventually sold that product and received real income, real MONEY for it. He lost that eventual sale.

Yes, so he lost 30 real dollars and 70 in future sales. 100 dollars.

>trying this hard to not feel stupid

It isn't 200, it never will be.

lol

What about the 70 dollars the thief pay to receive the goods?

Waiting for the leaf to post the gold ball problem, and his code for a poorly constructed simulation of a different scenario than the prompt sets up

Team 50%

You're forgetting the 100 he lost initially.

Ergo: 100+100. ie., 200$$

You mean the 100 given back to the shop owner?

Op doesn't understand capitalism and marking up prices of goods sold

There isn't enough info to answer this. We don't know what the mark up on the $70 of goods are. Is that the price the store paid for the goods? If so, the answer is

Start with 500 in cash and 1000 in inventory.
-100 cash for theft,
400 and 1000
-70 in inventory for the purchase, but +70 money back evens that out, 500 and 930
Then, 30 for change, so 470 and 930.

Answer is $100

He gave the 100 back though

>The shop owner would have eventually sold that product and received real income, real MONEY
This is real money, that you already counted as a loss when it got stolen
Why would you count it twice

The answer is "$100" but the shop owner actually lost less.

The robber took $70 of goods...but the store owner paid a lot less.

So technically speaking....$70 is probably the right answer. $30 in actual cash (given as change) and $40 Cost Of Goods (which were then marked up to $70)

He gave the shop keeper back 100 STOLEN money.

Ergo

-100
-70 (goods)
-30 (change)

= 100+70+30 = 200

you lose 100 dollars

guy takes 100 dollars

the guy comes back and gives it back but takes 70 worth of merchandise and 30 in change in exchange for it, because you're stupid and don't notice the same black guy who stole 100 dollars from the register in front of you came back five fucking minutes later and pretended to be shopping

therefore 100 dollars.

Because the $70 in cash and $70 in product are two separate things.

If I take 100 dollars from you then give it back, how much money have you lost?

Only correct answer. It depends on the cost of goods and his potential profit

the second he uses it to pay the shopkeeper breaks even aside from the products and the change dude

Here's what I posted in your last shit thread:

Depends on the profit margins of what she bought.

Effectively it's like her stealing $70 of store credit and $30 cash. Store credit is worth less than cash.

If someone steals 100 dollars from you than gives it back have you lost any money?

>answer is $100
More than $100, you need to account for the cost of inventory, taxes, etc.

He didn't give it back though. He used it to steal an additional 70 money of goods + 30 money in change

i.e.,

-100
-70
-30

he doesnt give it back though he uses it to steal more stuff

$100

Yes because that money was used to purchase things he owned and would have turned a profit for. If he had just given the money back without purchasing anything then it would have been fine.

So how did he pay for the goods if he didn't give the shopkeeper any money?

this isn't the right way to phrase it, he's missing the part where the shopkeeper ends up with the 100 dollar bill at the end of the day as if it wasn't stolen so when you phrase it like that he goes "but the stolen products!" then gets confused and thinks we're a bunch of jews.

This.. toothpastes are so retarded.

>stolen money
the shopkeeper didn't gain any money because it was stolen.

-100 (stolen)
-70 (goods)
-30 (change)

== -200

He did give the shopkeeper the money back, it was just his own money.
If I took a $20 out of your wallet and told you I'd give you that $20 for your watch, and you agreed, then did you actually receive anything?

None of the above as there is markup on the goods so a portion of his loss would be earned back by getting that $70 for a trade of only X dollars of goods

The real question is how much money was stolen by the government in the process.

he doesn't give it back, he uses it to make a transaction at the same store. so the shopkeeper - who was down a 100 dollar bill - is handed back the same 100 dollar bill, but erroneously allows the man to take 70 and merchandise and 30 in change with the stolen money. therefore, he is down 100 dollars in merchandise and change while retaining the $100 bill.

Are you just pretending?

The owner didn't "lose" any money. It was stolen by a nigger.

This only works if the thief uses a different 100 money bill. otherwise its still

100 (stolen)
70 (goods)
30 (change)

== 200

The answer is A. He lost 30 dollars in cash and 70 dollars worth of product. But the question only asks how much money did he lose.

The real Sup Forums question is what was the ethnicity of the robber?

It's a pretty clever hustle, he/she obviously really needs food and not drugs, or they would have absconded with the stolen $100 bill, rather than returning to get groceries and a little cash.

My money is on hispanic.

Jesus titty fucking Christ
No wonder you lot hate the kikes - you're literally too dumb to realise when they're robbing you blind

100

Shopkeeper has $170 ($100 cash and $70 good)

Person Steals $100. Shopkeeper now has ($70 goods)

Person Gives $100 back to shop (Shopkeeper now has $170, $100 cash and $70 good)

Shopkeeper gives person $70 good and $30 change (Shopkeeper has $70 cash)

Initial - final = Amount stolen

$170 - $70 = $100

the thief does not walk away with the 100 stolen dollars though, the only thing the shopkeeper doesn't have at the end of the day is his 70 dollars in merchadise and 30 dollars in change because of the 100 dollars the black man used to shop after stealing from the same store.

But I didn't lose any money, only the watch.

Insufficient information. No information is provided as to how much the owner is marking up his goods.

Sage

Trick question, fiat American dollars are worthless. The thief should have stolen gold bullion

Here's a question. Does the thief still have 100 dollars, and if so how?

Hahahahaha fucking ameirfats :D
Dont bother with proxies ur fat is showing
Hahahahaa holy shit lol :-D

$100 in cash. ($30 in change is part of this.)
$70 of on hand goods.
The food was not purchased, he essentially gave it away. Adding up to a total of $170.

I didn't ask if you lost any money. I asked what you received for your own $20.

I gave you the relevant answer.

The "$70 goods" are not actually worth $70 to the shopkeeper.

you can still gain money when you are in the negative you idiot

What in the fuck is with all these fucking quiz questions threads?

Who gives a fuck?

And don't give me this "it's just a picture" bullshit.

What the fuck is going on here.

Wasn't relevant to my question. You could have sold that watch and made money. That watch was worth something, and you lost it.

- 100 bill
- 70 goods
+ 100 bill to pay the goods
-30 change

the owner lost 100 bucks

It's the hot-ticket meme of the moment where people pretend to be retarded to get attention. It's been showing up on every board.

I never disagreed with this as it comes to the original question. You might need to brush up on your reading skills.

Lol fuck you you ain't shit, Northside College Prep reporting in

I'm putting this faggoty crap to an end. Retail store owner here.

Guy steals 100. (-100 me, +100 theif)
--------------------------------------------------------------
70 dollars worth of goods. (Most likely costs the business 30 bucks) I return 30 bucks to him.
(Store is out 60 bucks)
--------------------------------------------------------------

This is the only option. Anything else, you're a faggot who doesn't understand business. Put another way... Forget he stole the money since he handed it back to you. You've given him the goods and the change. Anything else you're a fucking idiot and should off yourself.
Current loss - 160.00

I understand you never disagreed with it but you cannot say you didn't lose any money.

the merchandise which he could sell for 70 dollars to another costumer for money that wasn't stolen from him

it's 200 dollars

Like an idiot I type 160 hahahahaha... I'm getting the shotgun ready.

The $70 is the only value that can be placed on the goods based on the information of the question. The answers either $100 or unsolvable.

>what is robbing peter to pay paul

Store owner loses 100 bucks
Store owner gains 70 dollars but loses 70 dollars in goods and opportunity costs.
Store owner still lost 100 bucks.
Simple.

He did not lose the initial 100 dollar bill since it was given back to him during the purchase. He lost the merchandise and 30 in chance.