You're an idiot. His wording was ambiguous anyway. As a percentage of his original wealth, which is more useful in most situations, he is infinitely wealthier.
Name:
Anonymous2008-02-22 14:10
>>11
No he isn't. It's a mathematically meaningless proportion.
Person B has $1,000,000 and does a criminal stock trade to get another $1,000,000.
Both people experienced a 100% increase in their respective wealth.
Question: Who is better off?
So be careful with thinking that there is anything meaningful about saying you had an infinite increase in your wealth, asschasers.
Name:
Anonymous2008-02-23 11:47
>>15
Were you dropped as a child that you can't see you're asking a completely different question? The fact that the proportional increase is less pertinent in this situation does not make it irrelevant in all, or even most, situations.
>>16
Saying two people have equivalent increases of 100% is about as relevant as saying you have an infinite increase of wealth from zero. Stay focused, knobgobber. The SUBJECT is the inapplicability of mathematical truths to all objects.
Name:
Anonymous2008-02-23 15:45
>>17
I'm not sure what you're trying to say with that sentence, but I'm pretty sure that you didn't.
>>34
I don't believe in any of the scam companies listed but I do enjoy the motivational messages and positive anecdotes from this website here. It would be nice if more scam artists like yourself presented a blog as this site does so that I don't feel like I am being aggressively hassled. Car dealers and military recruiters understand this. Why doesn't everyone else?
Name:
Anonymous2013-04-19 2:03
You might be able to say you're infinitely times more wealthy.
0 * x = 1
I mean this is indeterminate and from my understanding there is some sort of infinity that will make this equal 1.
Name:
T + O + E = CA$H!2013-04-19 4:16
T + O + E = CA$H!
Want to learn how this amazing 'Make Money Online' Formula can be the 1 thing that changes your financial life forever : www.4stepcashblueprint.com/1-2