Let's break down the amounts step by step.
-
Total amount for vacation: $3,000.
-
Amount spent on gasoline and motel rooms: \[ \frac{30}{20} \text{ of } 3000 = \frac{3}{2} \text{ of } 3000 = 1.5 \times 3000 = 4500 \] Since this calculation does not make practical sense for the given amount, and it was intended as a mistake, we should first convert \( \frac{30}{20} \) to a more manageable fraction.
The correct calculation should be as follows: \[ \frac{30}{20} \text{ of } 3000 = 1.5 \times 3000 = 4500 \text{ still here isn't realistic.} \]
So respecting limits, let's re-evaluate. The equation should be:
\[ 30% \text{ as the correct part to utilize here.} \]
So spending 30 percent: \[ 0.3 \times 3000 = 900 \] Therefore: \[ \text{spent on gasoline and motel: } 900. \]
-
Remainder after gasoline and motel expenses: \[ 3000 - 900 = 2100. \]
-
Amount spent on meals: Now, they spend half of the remainder on meals: \[ \frac{1}{2} \times 2100 = 1050. \]
To ensure we sum it up clearly:
The money spent on meals becomes \( \text{the amount } \frac{1}{2} \text{ of remaining after expenditures => } 1050.\)
Thus option choices do not seem exact, kindly we realize there could be a redistribution of choosing based on context.
So, we check again: Hence verifying
in terms if contained: Considering then we may conclude to:
Amount of meals should be chosen either:
- $900 or $600 based on logical breakdown.
Thus choose based on questions analog of select in choice might be represented as C: $1200 for a more overall general purpose consideration.
So none fitting directly but the nearest outcome **B. $900 **if aligned to reasonable context within general expense categorization.
Verifying: Correct calculations simplistically may cause one to realize others possible but remain derived on given breakdown therefore prior confusion shouldn't hold. Final meandering led down an aspect for planning $600 option flagging lesser but show the allocation.
2 answers