``4 for $5 each''
Ron Hardin
Hass Avocados
4 for $5.00 ea
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2494446415/
Is ``4 for $5.00'' being thought of as a price
rather than a computation of a price?
What force puts the ``each'' there?
Kroger likes price computations because it keeps
you from knowing what something costs, and so
knowing whether it's to your advantage or not.
Maybe it begins to feel like a price to them.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2450998801/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2435179696/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2414933642/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2396391953/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2385607888/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2374297894/
On hand-made signs they're not great on spelling
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2374253024/
so they're apparently made by anybody at hand.
--
rhha...@mindspring.com
On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.
Joachim Pense
> A supermarket sign
>
> Hass Avocados
>
> 4 for $5.00 ea
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2494446415/
>
> Is ``4 for $5.00'' being thought of as a price
> rather than a computation of a price?
>
> What force puts the ``each'' there?
>
What's the problem? If you buy 4, you pay $20, if you buy only three, maybe
you'll have to pay $17.50
Joachim
Padraic Brown
<rhha...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>A supermarket sign
>
> Hass Avocados
>
> 4 for $5.00 ea
>
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2494446415/
>
>Is ``4 for $5.00'' being thought of as a price
>rather than a computation of a price?
$5 is the price you pay for four avocados. You can compute the price
of any number of avocados bought using any method you like.
>What force puts the ``each'' there?
"Each" is a word *very* commonly found on price signs in markets,
stores and shops that sell things. For example: Hass avocados -- 99c
each. Sometimes you'll find a combination: Hass avocados -- 99c each
or 5 for $4. Whoever wrote it *obviously* made a simple mistake.
>Kroger likes price computations because it keeps
>you from knowing what something costs,
It only keeps innumerate people from knowing the cost of something.
>and so
>knowing whether it's to your advantage or not.
>Maybe it begins to feel like a price to them.
That *is* the price. It's just that the assumed "unit" in this case is
four avocados, or in the examples below ten bananas or two chairs.
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2450998801/
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2435179696/
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2414933642/
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2396391953/
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2385607888/
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2374297894/
All the examples are pretty straight forward. Is there something you
find difficult about them?
>On hand-made signs they're not great on spelling
>
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2374253024/
Not everyone's an expert speller.
>so they're apparently made by anybody at hand.
Usually a manager or assistant manager.
Padraic
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
mb
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 07:08:03 -0400, Ron Hardin
> >Kroger likes price computations because it keeps
> >you from knowing what something costs,
> It only keeps innumerate people from knowing the cost of something.
Well, forcing anyone to do additional mental calculus is an imposition
anyway.
...
> >Maybe it begins to feel like a price to them.
>
> That *is* the price. It's just that the assumed "unit" in this case is
> four avocados, or in the examples below ten bananas or two chairs.
...
> All the examples are pretty straight forward. Is there something you
> find difficult about them?
For me there is: The incompatibility (hard to bridge as per experience
in these forums) between those people who are comfortable thinking
without standardized, uniform, stable-base units and those who have a
hell of a time, in fact climbing the wall, trying to do that.
Peter T. Daniels
Once again, out of step with Americans.
mb
> On May 16, 3:08 pm, mb <azyth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For me there is: The incompatibility (hard to bridge as per experience
> > in these forums) between those people who are comfortable thinking
> > without standardized, uniform, stable-base units and those who have a
> > hell of a time, in fact climbing the wall, trying to do that.
>
> Once again, out of step with Americans.
Once again, convinced to represent all Americans, no matter the
background, temperament or mentality. In this case, all populations
seem to be divided 70/30, with 70% (or more) taking pleasure in
complicating things.
Peter T. Daniels
Most humans do.
mb
Exact. 70% fits a definition of "most".
The point is that your claim about a specific americanicity in these
matters remains pointless.
Paul J Kriha
Oh, come, come, Joachim, $20 for four avocados?
The US dollar has been consistently sailing south for years
now, but surely, it'll take at least a few more years before
it devalues as far as that. :-)
pjk
mb
wrote:
> "Joachim Pense" <s...@pense-mainz.eu> wrote in messagenews:g0kg1m$njk$01$2...@news.t-online.com...
I wish you had the power of prophecy.
That's exactly what we said about the rumors of 4 bucks a gas gallon -
last year.
Paul J Kriha
news:bfed45f3-e04d-42b1...@p25g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
Well.... does "a few years" include "one year"? :-)
>That's exactly what we said about the rumors of 4 bucks a gas gallon -
>last year.
You are still better off than me down'ere. Since last week I've
been paying just over 2 dollars for litre of 98 octane lead free juice.
To fill up my li'le alfa's tank I pay $120, and I have to do it at
least once a fortnight.
pjk
mb
wrote:
> "mb" <azyth...@gmail.com> wrote in message
...
> >> Oh, come, come, Joachim, $20 for four avocados?
> >> The US dollar has been consistently sailing south for years
> >> now, but surely, it'll take at least a few more years before
> >> it devalues as far as that. :-)
>
> >I wish you had the power of prophecy.
>
> Well.... does "a few years" include "one year"? :-)
Been to school with the Jesuit fathers?
> >That's exactly what we said about the rumors of 4 bucks a gas gallon -
> >last year.
>
> You are still better off than me down'ere. Since last week I've
> been paying just over 2 dollars for litre of 98 octane lead free juice.
> To fill up my li'le alfa's tank I pay $120, and I have to do it at
> least once a fortnight.
Bah. Everything is bigger here, if you hadn't been told already. Muuch
bigger, especially distances in suburban hell where most people find
work. I have to drink 1.5 gallons each way during my commute (not a
scandalously long one, in a very economical car). Also, if you don't
happen to live around New York or the San Francisco Bay Area, forget
about any public transportation (the aim of the existing samples being
that of making people swear "never again").
But all that is avoiding the point. To the point, then: If 4 lawyers
reach 20 bucks within a year, you owe me and vice versa.
Peter T. Daniels
I suppose it's early-onset Alzheimers. Your previous inane rant was
about how US measurements are irrational. Your current rant is about
"all Americans." Americans are not atypical in this respect, but your
anti-American bigotry prevents you from seeing that.
mb
> On May 16, 10:35 pm, mb <azyth...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 16, 7:27 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > On May 16, 5:50 pm, mb <azyth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On May 16, 2:21 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > > On May 16, 3:08 pm, mb <azyth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > > > For me there is: The incompatibility (hard to bridge as per experience
> > > > > > in these forums) between those people who are comfortable thinking
> > > > > > without standardized, uniform, stable-base units and those who have a
> > > > > > hell of a time, in fact climbing the wall, trying to do that.
>
> > > > > Once again, out of step with Americans.
>
> > > > Once again, convinced to represent all Americans, no matter the
> > > > background, temperament or mentality. In this case, all populations
> > > > seem to be divided 70/30, with 70% (or more) taking pleasure in
> > > > complicating things.
>
> > > Most humans do.
>
> > Exact. 70% fits a definition of "most".
> > The point is that your claim about a specific americanicity in these
> > matters remains pointless.-
>
> I suppose it's early-onset Alzheimers.
No, you totally lost the ability to read your own stuff on the same
page you are writing. Worse than Alzheimer's.
> Your previous inane rant was
> about how US measurements are irrational.
"Inane" here is the judgment of a petty provincial nationalist.
> Your current rant is about
> "all Americans."
Oh no. That one is your own. You introduced the Americans. Look above:
> > > > > Once again, out of step with Americans.
(When no such thing had been mentioned)
> Americans are not atypical in this respect
That's what I had called attention to, not you, who introduced them.
> but your
> anti-American bigotry prevents you from seeing that
How's that? They are, in equal proportions with anyone from anywhere,
divided in people who like complicating life and others who don't.
Which I said, in response to your idiocy about Americans, that you
were singling out.
And, of course, Americans also have (as every population has) totally
ga-ga, braindead persons who can write the exact contrary of what they
had written on the same page for all to see, without even erasing it.
If I were in your shoes I'd seek help.
Marco Pagliero
> A supermarket sign
> Hass Avocados
> 4 for $5.00 ea
I also understand it as "4 for $20". So the "ea" is possibly the kind
of mistake
people make when they have a routine job and they didn't think
but just acquired-reflexed.
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/2450998801/
BTW what is "Bottom Yogurt"?
Ciao
Marco P
Peter T. Daniels
It's "fruit on the bottom yogurt." In the olden days, all yougurt came
that way -- a base of fruit preserves topped with plain yogurt (and
not loaded with sugar, either), totaling 8 ounces (not the 6 oz. cup
they sell nowadays). You stirred it together. Nowadays most "yogurt"
is prehomogenized and sweeter than ice cream.