3 ms·
Sorry to hear about that. I doubt it makes you feel any better, but isn't that an effective cut of 4.4%? As a starting point, original pay was 100% of origina
by xwx 5y ago
Sorry to hear about that.
I doubt it makes you feel any better, but isn't that an effective cut of 4.4%?
As a starting point, original pay was 100% of original pay.
A year later, the same amount in real terms is, in nominal terms, 106.2% of the original amount (at 6.2% interest).
But, if you're being paid 101.5% of the original amount, in nominal terms, then in real terms you're being paid (101.5/106.2) = 0.9557... of the original amount. Which is about a 4.4% cut in real terms.
- giantg2 5y agoOk
- deanmoriarty 5y agoI am truly fascinated by your comment. I have to ask, what was the mental process that brought you to write it? I am specifically wondering why a person would write such a pedantic (in my opinion, no offense whatsoever) comment, stated with absolute seriousness. Is this just an instance of “someone is factually wrong on the Internet and I _have_ to correct them”, or were you really thinking there would be a chance that the OP would feel better as a result of your observation?
- giantg2 5y agoI mean, even though it made me feel even more shitty, it was a good reminder that I made raw common mistake of subtracting two percentages vs dividing to form the new percentage. I should have known better.