• halvar@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Guy #1 is correct and I wouldn’t say guy #2 is confidently incorrect, as he only sent one message.

    • GrimSheeper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      1 year ago

      Guy #1 calculates the payment per month. Guy #2 tries to “correct” him by calculating the payment per year. Guy #1 suggests that Guy #2 divide his answer by 12.

        • GrimSheeper@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Right, but the $50k figure mentioned is a yearly salary, not a monthly income. If you paid $4,500 a month on a $50,000 salary, you would pay $54,000 in child support per year, which is more than your total income.

          • Zorque@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            20
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s definitely odd to swap timescales, though. Almost like he was baiting people to be wrong.

            • AFK BRB Chocolate@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think the deal is that most people can judge an annual salary than a monthly one, so he’s trying to give a comparison of what the same percentage would be a month for someone with a more modest income. Guy #2 just didn’t notice that.

            • Laticauda@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Not really, the article mentions the monthly amount, so they compared it to a monthly amount from someone who makes less money per year. A yearly salary is what most people in the work force in the US are used to talking about when referencing income, which is why they used that instead of monthly income. It also contrasts the dramatic difference in income between the average worker and someone who makes many times more in a single month than the average person does in an entire year.

              • Zorque@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                In an in-depth critical analysis, sure, not a pithy tweet.

                I can accept that it wasn’t an intentional attempt at driving clicks through casual misinterpretation, though unlikely. But it’s not an effective way to convey information to swap scales when trying to make comparisons. If you wanted to make that kind of comparison, you’d do it separately. At least if you were trying to convey a cogent point.

                • Laticauda@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s a tweet not a thesis statement. It isn’t difficult to understand what they’re saying without needing them to send it in to an editor to make sure it meets academic standards of conveying info.

  • edinbruh
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    What’s the issue here? Seems correct to me

  • eerongal@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    first/last person (same person) is incorrect; it says 258k/month, therefore you wouldn’t divide said 9% by 12, i.e. equates to 4500/month on 50k.

    edit, wait, no, im wrong, first guy is correct; 2.8 million per month on the income as well

    • Corhen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yea, that’s the punch. All the numbers are per month, guy confidently incorectly kicks in with a yearly figure, gets actually corrected.