All about flooble | fun stuff | Get a free chatterbox | Free JavaScript | Avatars    
perplexus dot info

Home > Logic
Around The World (Posted on 2003-03-20) Difficulty: 4 of 5
While walking in a park, one morning, I found a Hundred Rupee note on one of the park benches. I picked it up, noted the number and took it home.

In the afternoon the plumber called on me to collect his bill. As I had no other moey at home, I settled his account with the Hundred Rupee note that I had found.

Later I came to know that the plumber paid the note to his milkman to settle his monthly account , who paid it to his tailor for the garments he had made.

The tailor in turn used the money to buy an old sewing machine, from a woman who lives in my neighbourhood. This woman incidentally, had borrowed Hundred Rupees from me sometime back to buy some household appliance. She, remembering that she owed me a Hundred Rupees, came and paid the debt.

I recognized the note as the one that I had found on the park bench, and on careful examination, I discovered that the note was counterfeit.

How much was lost in the whole transaction and by whom ?

See The Solution Submitted by Ravi Raja    
Rating: 3.5556 (27 votes)

Comments: ( Back to comment list | You must be logged in to post comments.)
re(6): The solution | Comment 95 of 131 |
(In reply to re(5): The solution by Ravi Raja)

The woman owed the narrator 100 rupees. She no longer owes the narrotor 100 rupees, not because of the worthless 100-rupee note, but rather, because of a chain giving that has resulted in the plumber being paid off, again not in the form of that worthless 100-rupee note, but rather value received in garments.

Thus two debts have been paid off: the one the woman owed to the narrator, and the one the narrator owed to the plumber.

Looked at in a short-circuited way, you could even consider the previous situation one in which the woman owed the plumber 100-rupees, with the narrator as an intermediary.

But in any case, previously the plumber was owed 100-rupees. Now he has received 100 rupees worth of garments and so is de facto paid off, relieving the narrator of his debt. The narrator was owed 100 rupees by the woman and now no longer is, but in turn no longer owes the plumber. And the woman, is out the sewing machine, but rightfully so as her debt to the narrator is now de facto discharged.

De Jure, they'd have to pass around a real 100-rupee note, but it would make no material difference. But the incident did result in the settling of debts.
  Posted by Charlie on 2003-04-20 04:36:10

Please log in:
Remember me:
Sign up! | Forgot password

Search body:
Forums (44)
Newest Problems
Random Problem
FAQ | About This Site
Site Statistics
New Comments (2)
Unsolved Problems
Top Rated Problems
This month's top
Most Commented On

Copyright © 2002 - 2019 by Animus Pactum Consulting. All rights reserved. Privacy Information