Depends whether you say increases BY or increases TO. On 26 Jul 2014 05:23, "Richard R. Pope" wrote: > Sean, > If I increase something by 100% that is a doubling. If I increase > it by 100% again that is a quad. If I increase it a third time that is > octal. So if we start with 100, we then have 200, and then 400, and > finally 800. This is a three hundred percent increase. This is simple > basic math and this is where most people go wrong with percentages. > So are you saying that we double the first 100 when we have a 100% > increase but then we only add 100 more for the second 100% increase? > Then we add another 100 for the the third 100% increase? > Nope. 100% doubles, another 100% doubles again, another 100% > doubles again,...... > Thanks, > rich > P.S. I left the following info on purpose. > Thanks, > rich! > > On 7/25/2014 11:01 PM, Sean Breheny wrote: > > Rich, > > > > You are only partly correct about percent - you are right that a 200% > > increase is not a doubling. But it is not a quadrupling either. It is a > > tripling. > > > > It has nothing to do with exponentiation. The formula is percentage > > increase =3D 100 * (amount of increase) / (original amount). > > > > 300% would be a quadrupling. 400% a quintupling, etc. > > > > Sean > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Richard R. Pope < > mechanic_2@charter.net> > > wrote: > > > >> IVP, > >> The one that burns me is the one that uses terms like our busine= ss > >> increased 200%. First of all 200% is not a doubling. It is an increase > >> of four times. Second of all is they don't tell you that last year the= y > >> sold 12 pieces and this year they sold 24 pieces. They make it sound > >> like they went from 400M to 800M. Yeah, right. Very rarely do I see > >> percent being used correctly. It is the number raised to the power of > >> the percent. 300% is eight times not a tripling. > >> And yes you are correct about companies that sell cheap stuff th= at > >> people won't waste the time and effort to complain about. This is a lo= t > >> like our police department. If you don't report the crime then the cri= me > >> didn't happen. We have the lowest crime rate in the area but this isn'= t > >> because crimes aren't happening here it is because the police ignore t= he > >> crimes unless it involves a bigwig or someone just jumps up and down > >> screaming and yelling about it. > >> Another one is this drive to legalize MJ. Somehow it is being se= en > >> as a harmless drug. This is a lie. It is a very dangerous drug. In one > >> year there are definitive measurable and permanent changes to the brai= n. > >> In five years of constant and regular use the person is no longer able > >> to do higher math functions. Some people are loosing the ability to > >> speak clearly and concisely by then. The damage is wide spread and > >> permanent. it clearly shows up in a MRI. The whites, yellows, and blue= s > >> are gone. They have been replaced by orange, red, and worst of all > >> black. Black shows little or no brain function. > >> MJ can not be used. It can only be abused just like cigarettes. > >> Alcohol can be used or it can be abused. Unfortunately most people now > >> abuse alcohol. MJ combines the worst of alcohol and cigarettes. MJ als= o > >> destroys the kidneys, liver, lungs, heart, and spleen. In 15 years it > >> does the same amount of damage that a heavy smoker and drinker does in > >> 25-30 years. > >> Also because MJ is being viewed as being harmless more and more > >> people are toking and driving. MJUIs, that is MJ under the influence, > >> now out number DUIs in CA. It is awful. The police are for all practic= al > >> purposes ignoring MJ violations. > >> Our dictator Obama decreed that federal MJ laws in places that > have > >> legalized it locally shall not be enforced by the justice department. = It > >> is a crime for a law enforcement officer to ignore a crime that is in > >> progress. But the highest law enforcement officer in our country is > >> doing exactly that. We have already lost one generation to MJ and now = we > >> are going to lose a second. > >> Enough rant. I had to get this off my chest. My opinion and two > >> cents worth. > >> Thanks, > >> rich! > >> > >> On 7/25/2014 8:56 PM, IVP wrote: > >>>> for every customer that complained there were 9 others that didn't > >>> That is partly my problem with some products. If the product is > >>> cheap enough then some (many ?) people might consider chasing > >>> > >> -- > >> http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > >> View/change your membership options at > >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > >> > > -- > http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive > View/change your membership options at > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist > --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .