Congressional Democrats reveal that working Americans are paying the price for Trump's $1.5 trillion military funding, with gas prices soaring and families struggling to afford essentials. Are Republicans prioritizing war over the well-being of American families?
You realize that the excavator is more expensive so it gets it done faster yeah? Labor is dirt cheap, a dozen guys can do the same thing for a fraction of the price. It’s just gonna take 10 days instead of 1.
You’re just making shit up, and missing every single important point along the way as well. I’m pointing that out, but it’s also not surprising that you missed this…
but it’s also not surprising that you missed this…
missed
Obtuse pedants will really think “Wow, everyone else sure is stupid” because people make simplifications that don’t literally reflect the real world for the sake of an illustration.
Yes, I am aware that the overhead and efficiency of an excavator conspire to elevate the price of the job of digging a simple hole.
In the toy example you apparently didn’t read because you were too busy sweatily crafting a response, this excavator operator charges the same hourly rate “$x” while digging by hand that they did when they were going to use the excavator. That is explicitly unrealistic; the demand in real life is not even remotely that inflexible that they could get away with that. No. Shit. You can’t actually linearize the cost of this kind of inefficiency. There’s no friction, the excavator doesn’t require ongoing expenses to operate, and the string is massless.
You won. You owned the example problem by pointing out that there’s no such thing as an elastic collision. A+. You win physics and get to leave the class. Please.
Do you think typing paragraphs and bloviating makes you seem more intelligent?
Maybe there’s a reason why a “toy example” isn’t a good example to use in these cases, since everyone knows it’s far more complex. You don’t get your point across by missing points and pretending to be simple after the fact, just makes you look foolish and now trying to backtrack. You fucked up, own it instead of backing yourself into a corner.
You realize that the excavator is more expensive so it gets it done faster yeah? Labor is dirt cheap, a dozen guys can do the same thing for a fraction of the price. It’s just gonna take 10 days instead of 1.
You’re just making shit up, and missing every single important point along the way as well. I’m pointing that out, but it’s also not surprising that you missed this…
Obtuse pedants will really think “Wow, everyone else sure is stupid” because people make simplifications that don’t literally reflect the real world for the sake of an illustration.
Yes, I am aware that the overhead and efficiency of an excavator conspire to elevate the price of the job of digging a simple hole.
In the toy example you apparently didn’t read because you were too busy sweatily crafting a response, this excavator operator charges the same hourly rate “$x” while digging by hand that they did when they were going to use the excavator. That is explicitly unrealistic; the demand in real life is not even remotely that inflexible that they could get away with that. No. Shit. You can’t actually linearize the cost of this kind of inefficiency. There’s no friction, the excavator doesn’t require ongoing expenses to operate, and the string is massless.
You won. You owned the example problem by pointing out that there’s no such thing as an elastic collision. A+. You win physics and get to leave the class. Please.
Do you think typing paragraphs and bloviating makes you seem more intelligent?
Maybe there’s a reason why a “toy example” isn’t a good example to use in these cases, since everyone knows it’s far more complex. You don’t get your point across by missing points and pretending to be simple after the fact, just makes you look foolish and now trying to backtrack. You fucked up, own it instead of backing yourself into a corner.
The fact you think 180 words is worth remarking on actually explains a lot about why you’re having such a hard time with this.