Want this question answered?
Correct. In other words, nothing in this world is free. Say if you were taken to lunch by your boss, and he paid then even though you had a free lunch, the meal still cost money.
When economists say that people act rationally in their self interest they mean that
Why don't you just say that? Or you could say, 'I can stay for lunch but I only have forty-five minutes free, will that be too much of a rush?'
You can, but it is not idiomatic English. If you mean that people worked straight through their lunch time, use No one took lunch
You can, but it is not idiomatic English. If you mean that people worked straight through their lunch time, use No one took lunch
In Tamil, you can say "மதிப்பீடுக்காக மடியில் செல்லுவது" (Madhippeetukkaaga maṭiyil selluvadhu) to mean "going for lunch."
You say "had lunch"
Why are they not truly free? no such thing as a free lunch. This is a very lame attempt at bait and switch!
Have a lunch.
The phrase 'Have you had lunch' in Hindi can be translated as 'क्या तुमने दोपहर का खाना खाया है?' (Kya tumne dopahar ka khana khaya hai?)
you say lunch for and then how many people you have
It was developed by a Dutch economist and businessman.