[tmoertel]

Regarding this error:

> like repeating they decreased drugs price by 600%

The NYT and other media outlets like to point out that this claim is mathematically impossible. However, “cut prices by 600%” is understood perfectly well by most people (but not pedants) to mean “we undid price hikes of 600%.”

I suspect that this phrasing was chosen as a “wedge” to drive home to the MAGA faithful that the news media is biased against them.

[kyle-rb]

Does that logic apply only when the claimed cut is over 100%?

If I advertise that my store "cut prices by 50%" but the prices are actually only 33% lower (which is the same as undoing a 50% price hike), would it be pedantic to call me out on my bullshit?

[tmoertel]

> Does that logic apply only when the claimed cut is over 100%?

Yes, I’d say.

It’s the same as the informal usage of “X times smaller” to describe scaling by 1/X. The idiom generally isn’t used unless X > 1. (The exception might be when several values of X are reported together. Then one might say “0.74 times smaller” to maintain parallel form with nearby “4 times smaller” and similar claims.)