Frazz by Jef Mallett for February 27, 2018

I thought these kids were like 10 years old. I was way beyond 5×2 by grade 5. And I never saw that question on ‘Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?’

Debra’s right. Kids that age require more challenging problems. Geezers like myself appreciate them, too.

I hate having to explain jokes. There is a sale on hence the reference to the flyer. So two pairs are not twice as expensive & probably cost the same as one.

Ok, so if one sock costs $.50 per toe, how much would 2 pairs of socks cost?

$10.00.

Nailed it. (Had to really consider whether to hit the comment button on that one.)

$9.00.

And four pairs go for $16.

They’re less expensive per pair if you buy larger quantities.

If only that was all kids had to worry about.

Why “of all people”? Why would Mrs. Olsen “of all people” be more likely to know that socks are cheaper in quantity?

Here we go again.

I get the feeling that Mallett doesn’t know the answer.

Look how bored Caulfield is. Especially after repeating her class umpteen years.

The point isn’t about the MATH; it’s about how the story problems are outdated, and the teachers’ expectations of what is “normal” are also outdated from the kids’ perspective. Yesterday’s comic – cheap socks always come in 3-packs – and today’s – two pair of socks is probably some kind of discount deal – are about the pervasiveness of advertising and discount-or-surge-pricing and “Bonus FREE!” (rather than "Package Includes … "), and how it affects people’s assumptions about whether you can plan or calculate anything. Mallett is discussing a profound societal trend, just like Stephen Colbert “demanding” cheap tube socks (as an opening to mention they’re made with child slave labor).

Caulfield is that kid in any class, who gets behind because he is always looking ahead for more challenging problems.

Frazz11 hrs ·

Practitioners of endurance sports know, and will assuredly tell you if you get too cocky, the standard mantra that “anybody can do the first half of a workout.” (That is one of those concepts that is more true than accurate; I have watched many an endurance athlete whose first half-workout, whose, hell, warm-up I could not complete. But you get the idea.)

I get the impression shopping sales might be the same way. (Let’s issue the disclaimer here that I make it a policy to avoid sales because I have a toxic mix of sufficient and insufficient discipline. I know that the whole purpose of a sale is to convince me to buy something I otherwise might not buy, or even have otherwise thought of buying, which does exactly the opposite of saving me money. So I use what discipline I have to avoid sales, because [and this has been proven] I do not have the discipline to anticipate something I’ll really need and then wait for a sale and buy only that thing. Sorry. We now return to our original topic, which wasn’t any more useful or linear, so I’m not sure what I’m apologizing for.)

Anybody can buy the first item on sale. It’s that second one. If the second one is free, then what’s the difference between 2-for-1 and buy-one-get-one? Are they the same? Does it vary from store to store? How identical do the “ones” have to be? Does it vary from store to store? Is it really just another word for nothing left to lose? And what about buy one get one half off? Half off which item’s price? How about Get $10 back when you spend $50? What if you spend $51 and get your $10 back? Now you’ve only spent $41. Do you have to give the $10 back and start over until you buy $60 worth of stuff? This is getting dangerously close to algebra with two variables, which is where I fell off the back never to see the nerd-o-ton* again.

Okay. Maybe why I avoid sales has less to do with discipline than I initially tried to argue._________________________*You know, I’d just let that one go.

“over-thinking the simplest things”? Really? Sure sound to me like at least two (not one) of the regulars here.)