Sure, I suppose B could have been hired decades ago, so at any single given point in time he will still be making more than A. But that's dumb.

It doesn't ask who gets more money. It just asks who receives the most.

The most increases is B with two increases every year followed by A who only gets one increase per year.

Clerk B gets most money in the first year but after that Clerk A takes the lead. I think I must be missing some point.

Assume both A and B get paid half a year's salary at the end of every 6 months; here's the totals for 3 years:

I was thinking along those lines, but remember, B's increase is $25 per year, received every six months. So for the second half of the first year B gets an annual rate of 525, which when /2 is 262.50, not 275.

ETA:

Attachment 36035

After 6 months they are even. After 12 months B is ahead. After 18 months A takes the lead and stays there.

I thought about that, but it's not clear from the wording.

True, there is ambiguity, but I think this is the most natural interpretation. Your sums are consistent with the other interpretation.

Yeah. Dammit.

You can put a cat in the oven, but, that don't make it a biscuit.

I don't know what that means, I just wanted to toss out another clever phrase.

OK, HLJ gets the various family member's ages right. The question of the two clerks has me a bit stumped and I have the answer from the book, but not the explanation.

The Answer is that "B receives $25 more per year than A"

I think part of the nut is remembering that you aren't paid before you work. And the other part is the somewhat sneaky wording "and B gets a $25 increase every six months" That doesn't mean that B is earning .5*500 for the first six months, then .5*525 for the next six months, while A earned 1*500 for 12 months.
It means that B gets 250 and then 275 as HLJ shows.

So I'm going to give him the points for this one.

The scores so far
Rhianne:1
HLJ: 2

Next nut coming up shortly.

My answer is better.

Now I just have to fit it in the box. ;)

OK, try this one:

$14.00

Bad $10 bill and a $4 pair of shoes

20 bucks.

Infi wins this one.

$4 shoes
$6 change
$10 make good on bad bill

$20.

Butt the shoes sold for $4.00. Surely they didn't actually cost him that much.
There would have been profit involved for the shoemaker.
Then again I guess we are talking opportunity cost ...

just bustin' on ya.