Famous businessman mathematical puzzle
question: A Businessman advertised two job openings for peons in his firm.Two men applied and the businessman decided to engage both of them.He offered them salary of $2000$ rupees per year. $1000$ rupees to be paid every half year,with a promise that their salary would be raised if their work proved satisfactory.They could have a raise of $300$ rupees per year ,(or) if they preferred,$100$ rupees each half year .The two men thought for few moments and then one of them expressed his wish to take the raise at $300$ rupees per year ,while the other man said he would accept the half yearly increase of $100$ rupees .between the two men,who was gainer .
$(a)$ First person
$(b)$ second person
$(c)$ both are equal
$(d)$none of these
my attempt :i thought answer should be first person because after one year he will get total sum as $1000+1000+300$(yearly raise)$=2300$
and second person ,after one year,end up getting $1000+100+1000+100=2200 $
so, definitely $300$ yearly offer is more lucrative .
but answer is given option $(b)$
please explain
arithmetic education puzzle
add a comment |
question: A Businessman advertised two job openings for peons in his firm.Two men applied and the businessman decided to engage both of them.He offered them salary of $2000$ rupees per year. $1000$ rupees to be paid every half year,with a promise that their salary would be raised if their work proved satisfactory.They could have a raise of $300$ rupees per year ,(or) if they preferred,$100$ rupees each half year .The two men thought for few moments and then one of them expressed his wish to take the raise at $300$ rupees per year ,while the other man said he would accept the half yearly increase of $100$ rupees .between the two men,who was gainer .
$(a)$ First person
$(b)$ second person
$(c)$ both are equal
$(d)$none of these
my attempt :i thought answer should be first person because after one year he will get total sum as $1000+1000+300$(yearly raise)$=2300$
and second person ,after one year,end up getting $1000+100+1000+100=2200 $
so, definitely $300$ yearly offer is more lucrative .
but answer is given option $(b)$
please explain
arithmetic education puzzle
1
Is there a possibility that something such as interest rates are at play? As in, the second person could put his money in the bank and with compound interest rates earn more than the other person who takes 300 rupees a year? Is this a possibility or does the question as you stated it cover all information we are allowed to use?
– S. Crim
1 hour ago
question is stated as it is ..without any alteration
– deleteprofile
1 hour ago
1
The first person would receive 2000 for the first year, 2300 for second, 2600 for the third, and so on. The second would receive (1000+1100) for the first, (1200+1300) for the second, (1400+1500) for the third, etc.
– Barry Cipra
57 mins ago
Well, you computation for case $b$ is wrong...post the first raise, after six months the man gets $1100$ and after another six months he gets $1200$ for a total of $2300$ for the year (same as in case $a$).
– lulu
57 mins ago
1
I think the confusion comes from the interpretation of case $a$. Is the $300$ an annual raise or a semi-annual raise? In both cases, I think the timing of the pay raises is ambiguous.
– lulu
53 mins ago
add a comment |
question: A Businessman advertised two job openings for peons in his firm.Two men applied and the businessman decided to engage both of them.He offered them salary of $2000$ rupees per year. $1000$ rupees to be paid every half year,with a promise that their salary would be raised if their work proved satisfactory.They could have a raise of $300$ rupees per year ,(or) if they preferred,$100$ rupees each half year .The two men thought for few moments and then one of them expressed his wish to take the raise at $300$ rupees per year ,while the other man said he would accept the half yearly increase of $100$ rupees .between the two men,who was gainer .
$(a)$ First person
$(b)$ second person
$(c)$ both are equal
$(d)$none of these
my attempt :i thought answer should be first person because after one year he will get total sum as $1000+1000+300$(yearly raise)$=2300$
and second person ,after one year,end up getting $1000+100+1000+100=2200 $
so, definitely $300$ yearly offer is more lucrative .
but answer is given option $(b)$
please explain
arithmetic education puzzle
question: A Businessman advertised two job openings for peons in his firm.Two men applied and the businessman decided to engage both of them.He offered them salary of $2000$ rupees per year. $1000$ rupees to be paid every half year,with a promise that their salary would be raised if their work proved satisfactory.They could have a raise of $300$ rupees per year ,(or) if they preferred,$100$ rupees each half year .The two men thought for few moments and then one of them expressed his wish to take the raise at $300$ rupees per year ,while the other man said he would accept the half yearly increase of $100$ rupees .between the two men,who was gainer .
$(a)$ First person
$(b)$ second person
$(c)$ both are equal
$(d)$none of these
my attempt :i thought answer should be first person because after one year he will get total sum as $1000+1000+300$(yearly raise)$=2300$
and second person ,after one year,end up getting $1000+100+1000+100=2200 $
so, definitely $300$ yearly offer is more lucrative .
but answer is given option $(b)$
please explain
arithmetic education puzzle
arithmetic education puzzle
edited 49 mins ago
Key Flex
7,59941232
7,59941232
asked 1 hour ago
deleteprofiledeleteprofile
1,109316
1,109316
1
Is there a possibility that something such as interest rates are at play? As in, the second person could put his money in the bank and with compound interest rates earn more than the other person who takes 300 rupees a year? Is this a possibility or does the question as you stated it cover all information we are allowed to use?
– S. Crim
1 hour ago
question is stated as it is ..without any alteration
– deleteprofile
1 hour ago
1
The first person would receive 2000 for the first year, 2300 for second, 2600 for the third, and so on. The second would receive (1000+1100) for the first, (1200+1300) for the second, (1400+1500) for the third, etc.
– Barry Cipra
57 mins ago
Well, you computation for case $b$ is wrong...post the first raise, after six months the man gets $1100$ and after another six months he gets $1200$ for a total of $2300$ for the year (same as in case $a$).
– lulu
57 mins ago
1
I think the confusion comes from the interpretation of case $a$. Is the $300$ an annual raise or a semi-annual raise? In both cases, I think the timing of the pay raises is ambiguous.
– lulu
53 mins ago
add a comment |
1
Is there a possibility that something such as interest rates are at play? As in, the second person could put his money in the bank and with compound interest rates earn more than the other person who takes 300 rupees a year? Is this a possibility or does the question as you stated it cover all information we are allowed to use?
– S. Crim
1 hour ago
question is stated as it is ..without any alteration
– deleteprofile
1 hour ago
1
The first person would receive 2000 for the first year, 2300 for second, 2600 for the third, and so on. The second would receive (1000+1100) for the first, (1200+1300) for the second, (1400+1500) for the third, etc.
– Barry Cipra
57 mins ago
Well, you computation for case $b$ is wrong...post the first raise, after six months the man gets $1100$ and after another six months he gets $1200$ for a total of $2300$ for the year (same as in case $a$).
– lulu
57 mins ago
1
I think the confusion comes from the interpretation of case $a$. Is the $300$ an annual raise or a semi-annual raise? In both cases, I think the timing of the pay raises is ambiguous.
– lulu
53 mins ago
1
1
Is there a possibility that something such as interest rates are at play? As in, the second person could put his money in the bank and with compound interest rates earn more than the other person who takes 300 rupees a year? Is this a possibility or does the question as you stated it cover all information we are allowed to use?
– S. Crim
1 hour ago
Is there a possibility that something such as interest rates are at play? As in, the second person could put his money in the bank and with compound interest rates earn more than the other person who takes 300 rupees a year? Is this a possibility or does the question as you stated it cover all information we are allowed to use?
– S. Crim
1 hour ago
question is stated as it is ..without any alteration
– deleteprofile
1 hour ago
question is stated as it is ..without any alteration
– deleteprofile
1 hour ago
1
1
The first person would receive 2000 for the first year, 2300 for second, 2600 for the third, and so on. The second would receive (1000+1100) for the first, (1200+1300) for the second, (1400+1500) for the third, etc.
– Barry Cipra
57 mins ago
The first person would receive 2000 for the first year, 2300 for second, 2600 for the third, and so on. The second would receive (1000+1100) for the first, (1200+1300) for the second, (1400+1500) for the third, etc.
– Barry Cipra
57 mins ago
Well, you computation for case $b$ is wrong...post the first raise, after six months the man gets $1100$ and after another six months he gets $1200$ for a total of $2300$ for the year (same as in case $a$).
– lulu
57 mins ago
Well, you computation for case $b$ is wrong...post the first raise, after six months the man gets $1100$ and after another six months he gets $1200$ for a total of $2300$ for the year (same as in case $a$).
– lulu
57 mins ago
1
1
I think the confusion comes from the interpretation of case $a$. Is the $300$ an annual raise or a semi-annual raise? In both cases, I think the timing of the pay raises is ambiguous.
– lulu
53 mins ago
I think the confusion comes from the interpretation of case $a$. Is the $300$ an annual raise or a semi-annual raise? In both cases, I think the timing of the pay raises is ambiguous.
– lulu
53 mins ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
The way I interpret this problem, the salaries go as follows:
Person 1:
He gets paid $2000$ for the first year, $2300$ for the second year, $2600$ for the third year, etc. So for the $n$th year he gets paid $2000+300(n-1)$.
Person 2:
He gets paid $1000+1100$ for the first year, $1200+1300$ for the second year, $1400+1500$ for the third year, etc. So he does end up getting paid more, year-by-year, because his raises occur more frequently and so can build up more.
add a comment |
Suppose if they get $100$ each half year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1100=2100$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1200+1300=2500$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1400+1500=2900$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1600+1700=3300$$
Suppose if they get $300$ each per year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1000=2000$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1150+1150=2300$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1300+1300=2600$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1450+1450=2900$$
Now can you see which one is profitable.
add a comment |
You are paid at the end of the work period, so in the first year the first man gets $1000$ twice for $2000$, then is raised to $2300/$year for the second year. The second gets $1000$ for the first six months and $1100$ for the second, giving a total of $2100$. He is ahead by $100$ after the first year.
The second year the first man gets $1150$ each time for a total of $2300$. The second gets another raise to $1200$ for the first six months and one to $1300$ for the second six months, giving a total of $2500$. He is ahead by $200$ in the second year.
In general, in year $k$, the first man gets $2000+300(k-1)$. The second gets $2000+2cdot 100cdot (k-1)+2cdot 100 cdot (k-1)+100=2000+400(k-1)+100$ and his advantage grows by $100$ each year.
add a comment |
You have calculated the year end salary of the first person correctly as he's getting his salary annually with an annual raise of $300$. So
$$N_1 = 2000+300=2300/year$$
Now the second person is getting his salary and his raises half yearly
$$N_2 = 1000+100 =1100/half year$$
during the first half. Now during the second half he again gets a raise of $100$ making his salary
$$N_3 = 1100 +100 =1200/halfyearly =2400/year$$
1
You are granting the raises too early. Look at Ross Millikan's answer.
– saulspatz
51 mins ago
@saulspatz all these salaries are at the end of the first year, not during
– Sauhard Sharma
50 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3065097%2ffamous-businessman-mathematical-puzzle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The way I interpret this problem, the salaries go as follows:
Person 1:
He gets paid $2000$ for the first year, $2300$ for the second year, $2600$ for the third year, etc. So for the $n$th year he gets paid $2000+300(n-1)$.
Person 2:
He gets paid $1000+1100$ for the first year, $1200+1300$ for the second year, $1400+1500$ for the third year, etc. So he does end up getting paid more, year-by-year, because his raises occur more frequently and so can build up more.
add a comment |
The way I interpret this problem, the salaries go as follows:
Person 1:
He gets paid $2000$ for the first year, $2300$ for the second year, $2600$ for the third year, etc. So for the $n$th year he gets paid $2000+300(n-1)$.
Person 2:
He gets paid $1000+1100$ for the first year, $1200+1300$ for the second year, $1400+1500$ for the third year, etc. So he does end up getting paid more, year-by-year, because his raises occur more frequently and so can build up more.
add a comment |
The way I interpret this problem, the salaries go as follows:
Person 1:
He gets paid $2000$ for the first year, $2300$ for the second year, $2600$ for the third year, etc. So for the $n$th year he gets paid $2000+300(n-1)$.
Person 2:
He gets paid $1000+1100$ for the first year, $1200+1300$ for the second year, $1400+1500$ for the third year, etc. So he does end up getting paid more, year-by-year, because his raises occur more frequently and so can build up more.
The way I interpret this problem, the salaries go as follows:
Person 1:
He gets paid $2000$ for the first year, $2300$ for the second year, $2600$ for the third year, etc. So for the $n$th year he gets paid $2000+300(n-1)$.
Person 2:
He gets paid $1000+1100$ for the first year, $1200+1300$ for the second year, $1400+1500$ for the third year, etc. So he does end up getting paid more, year-by-year, because his raises occur more frequently and so can build up more.
answered 57 mins ago
Calvin GodfreyCalvin Godfrey
453311
453311
add a comment |
add a comment |
Suppose if they get $100$ each half year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1100=2100$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1200+1300=2500$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1400+1500=2900$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1600+1700=3300$$
Suppose if they get $300$ each per year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1000=2000$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1150+1150=2300$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1300+1300=2600$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1450+1450=2900$$
Now can you see which one is profitable.
add a comment |
Suppose if they get $100$ each half year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1100=2100$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1200+1300=2500$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1400+1500=2900$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1600+1700=3300$$
Suppose if they get $300$ each per year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1000=2000$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1150+1150=2300$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1300+1300=2600$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1450+1450=2900$$
Now can you see which one is profitable.
add a comment |
Suppose if they get $100$ each half year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1100=2100$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1200+1300=2500$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1400+1500=2900$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1600+1700=3300$$
Suppose if they get $300$ each per year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1000=2000$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1150+1150=2300$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1300+1300=2600$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1450+1450=2900$$
Now can you see which one is profitable.
Suppose if they get $100$ each half year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1100=2100$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1200+1300=2500$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1400+1500=2900$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1600+1700=3300$$
Suppose if they get $300$ each per year. Then the following are the possible outcomes
$$1^{st}mbox{ year } 1000+1000=2000$$
$$2^{nd}mbox{ year } 1150+1150=2300$$
$$3^{rd}mbox{ year } 1300+1300=2600$$
$$4^{th}mbox{ year } 1450+1450=2900$$
Now can you see which one is profitable.
answered 51 mins ago
Key FlexKey Flex
7,59941232
7,59941232
add a comment |
add a comment |
You are paid at the end of the work period, so in the first year the first man gets $1000$ twice for $2000$, then is raised to $2300/$year for the second year. The second gets $1000$ for the first six months and $1100$ for the second, giving a total of $2100$. He is ahead by $100$ after the first year.
The second year the first man gets $1150$ each time for a total of $2300$. The second gets another raise to $1200$ for the first six months and one to $1300$ for the second six months, giving a total of $2500$. He is ahead by $200$ in the second year.
In general, in year $k$, the first man gets $2000+300(k-1)$. The second gets $2000+2cdot 100cdot (k-1)+2cdot 100 cdot (k-1)+100=2000+400(k-1)+100$ and his advantage grows by $100$ each year.
add a comment |
You are paid at the end of the work period, so in the first year the first man gets $1000$ twice for $2000$, then is raised to $2300/$year for the second year. The second gets $1000$ for the first six months and $1100$ for the second, giving a total of $2100$. He is ahead by $100$ after the first year.
The second year the first man gets $1150$ each time for a total of $2300$. The second gets another raise to $1200$ for the first six months and one to $1300$ for the second six months, giving a total of $2500$. He is ahead by $200$ in the second year.
In general, in year $k$, the first man gets $2000+300(k-1)$. The second gets $2000+2cdot 100cdot (k-1)+2cdot 100 cdot (k-1)+100=2000+400(k-1)+100$ and his advantage grows by $100$ each year.
add a comment |
You are paid at the end of the work period, so in the first year the first man gets $1000$ twice for $2000$, then is raised to $2300/$year for the second year. The second gets $1000$ for the first six months and $1100$ for the second, giving a total of $2100$. He is ahead by $100$ after the first year.
The second year the first man gets $1150$ each time for a total of $2300$. The second gets another raise to $1200$ for the first six months and one to $1300$ for the second six months, giving a total of $2500$. He is ahead by $200$ in the second year.
In general, in year $k$, the first man gets $2000+300(k-1)$. The second gets $2000+2cdot 100cdot (k-1)+2cdot 100 cdot (k-1)+100=2000+400(k-1)+100$ and his advantage grows by $100$ each year.
You are paid at the end of the work period, so in the first year the first man gets $1000$ twice for $2000$, then is raised to $2300/$year for the second year. The second gets $1000$ for the first six months and $1100$ for the second, giving a total of $2100$. He is ahead by $100$ after the first year.
The second year the first man gets $1150$ each time for a total of $2300$. The second gets another raise to $1200$ for the first six months and one to $1300$ for the second six months, giving a total of $2500$. He is ahead by $200$ in the second year.
In general, in year $k$, the first man gets $2000+300(k-1)$. The second gets $2000+2cdot 100cdot (k-1)+2cdot 100 cdot (k-1)+100=2000+400(k-1)+100$ and his advantage grows by $100$ each year.
answered 57 mins ago
Ross MillikanRoss Millikan
292k23197371
292k23197371
add a comment |
add a comment |
You have calculated the year end salary of the first person correctly as he's getting his salary annually with an annual raise of $300$. So
$$N_1 = 2000+300=2300/year$$
Now the second person is getting his salary and his raises half yearly
$$N_2 = 1000+100 =1100/half year$$
during the first half. Now during the second half he again gets a raise of $100$ making his salary
$$N_3 = 1100 +100 =1200/halfyearly =2400/year$$
1
You are granting the raises too early. Look at Ross Millikan's answer.
– saulspatz
51 mins ago
@saulspatz all these salaries are at the end of the first year, not during
– Sauhard Sharma
50 mins ago
add a comment |
You have calculated the year end salary of the first person correctly as he's getting his salary annually with an annual raise of $300$. So
$$N_1 = 2000+300=2300/year$$
Now the second person is getting his salary and his raises half yearly
$$N_2 = 1000+100 =1100/half year$$
during the first half. Now during the second half he again gets a raise of $100$ making his salary
$$N_3 = 1100 +100 =1200/halfyearly =2400/year$$
1
You are granting the raises too early. Look at Ross Millikan's answer.
– saulspatz
51 mins ago
@saulspatz all these salaries are at the end of the first year, not during
– Sauhard Sharma
50 mins ago
add a comment |
You have calculated the year end salary of the first person correctly as he's getting his salary annually with an annual raise of $300$. So
$$N_1 = 2000+300=2300/year$$
Now the second person is getting his salary and his raises half yearly
$$N_2 = 1000+100 =1100/half year$$
during the first half. Now during the second half he again gets a raise of $100$ making his salary
$$N_3 = 1100 +100 =1200/halfyearly =2400/year$$
You have calculated the year end salary of the first person correctly as he's getting his salary annually with an annual raise of $300$. So
$$N_1 = 2000+300=2300/year$$
Now the second person is getting his salary and his raises half yearly
$$N_2 = 1000+100 =1100/half year$$
during the first half. Now during the second half he again gets a raise of $100$ making his salary
$$N_3 = 1100 +100 =1200/halfyearly =2400/year$$
answered 56 mins ago
Sauhard SharmaSauhard Sharma
94517
94517
1
You are granting the raises too early. Look at Ross Millikan's answer.
– saulspatz
51 mins ago
@saulspatz all these salaries are at the end of the first year, not during
– Sauhard Sharma
50 mins ago
add a comment |
1
You are granting the raises too early. Look at Ross Millikan's answer.
– saulspatz
51 mins ago
@saulspatz all these salaries are at the end of the first year, not during
– Sauhard Sharma
50 mins ago
1
1
You are granting the raises too early. Look at Ross Millikan's answer.
– saulspatz
51 mins ago
You are granting the raises too early. Look at Ross Millikan's answer.
– saulspatz
51 mins ago
@saulspatz all these salaries are at the end of the first year, not during
– Sauhard Sharma
50 mins ago
@saulspatz all these salaries are at the end of the first year, not during
– Sauhard Sharma
50 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3065097%2ffamous-businessman-mathematical-puzzle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Is there a possibility that something such as interest rates are at play? As in, the second person could put his money in the bank and with compound interest rates earn more than the other person who takes 300 rupees a year? Is this a possibility or does the question as you stated it cover all information we are allowed to use?
– S. Crim
1 hour ago
question is stated as it is ..without any alteration
– deleteprofile
1 hour ago
1
The first person would receive 2000 for the first year, 2300 for second, 2600 for the third, and so on. The second would receive (1000+1100) for the first, (1200+1300) for the second, (1400+1500) for the third, etc.
– Barry Cipra
57 mins ago
Well, you computation for case $b$ is wrong...post the first raise, after six months the man gets $1100$ and after another six months he gets $1200$ for a total of $2300$ for the year (same as in case $a$).
– lulu
57 mins ago
1
I think the confusion comes from the interpretation of case $a$. Is the $300$ an annual raise or a semi-annual raise? In both cases, I think the timing of the pay raises is ambiguous.
– lulu
53 mins ago