# I had $2.00. My mom gave me$10.00 while my dad gave me $30.00. Riddle: I had$2.00. My mom gave me $10.00 while my dad gave me$30.00. My aunt and uncle gave me $100.00. I had another$5.00. How much did I have?

Answer: The correct answer is 7 dollars. If you read the question carefully, the question asked about your first money with “how much money Did I really have?”.

The money you had is 10 dollars. That is before your parents and relatives gave you additional money.

However, given that the logic and time of the tense is in the past, it is safe to assume that the question pertains to the money you had originally before you received external money from someone else.

Therefore, you had 2 dollars and another 5 dollars originally with you, which sums up to 7 pounds.

## 3 Replies to “I had $2.00. My mom gave me$10.00 while my dad gave me $30.00.” 1. C. Bret Miller says: That is asinine, and not how the English language works. There is nothing within the context of the question as it is written that explicitly implies “ignore the values that you were given.” Yes, asking what one had is in the past tense, yet so is saying “someone gave you$2.” They gave you that $2 so that becomes part of the money you had. It’s an attempt to trick individuals utilizing word play, yet clearly whoever devises these types of questions lacks a competent mastery of the English language, because that’s not how tenses work. There is nothing stating that the money you were given occurred at different time. If you had$1 and your dad gave you $2 dollars (which again, is also in the pest tense… he’s not giving you the money or going to give you the money, her gave it to you) there is nothing within the question that explicitly states not to include money you were given, in the total value of money that you had. Hell, there’s nothing within the context of the text that is indicative of when you were given the money. They may have given it to you right after you had$2, and before you had another $5. Actually the way it is written, it would be a logical assumption that if you wrote someone gave you money before saying “you had another$5,” they gave you that money prior to you having another $5, as that is how the English language works. We assume things happen in the chronological order in which they are written. These riddles are almost as bad as the ones that show a series of picto- equations, without explicitly stating the values if the symbols, or stating that they cannot possess multiple values. You know.. the ones that work by misleading – they don’t actually state a soluble question and then people get tangled trying to get that solution. In this case, the pictures are ambiguous and therefore their actual numeric value cannot be identified. People argue over the definitions and miss the point that an ‘ambiguous’ answer – stating a range of values drawn from the available range of possibilities – is actually also correct and acceptable. This is essentially the same type of issue as that. 1. Anonymous says: If u read carefully the question is how much money did “I” really have as in how much did he himself have before anyone else had gave him some. N he had$2 n had $5 more so$2+$5=$7

2. Michelle says:

If u read carefully the question is how much money did “I” really have as in how much did he himself have before anyone else had gave him some. N he had $2 n had$5 more so $2+$5=\$7