Because you seem to be arguing your original interpretation was wrong.
"You don't get wages out of a flock". Yes, that's my point - since he gets the money from the flock, we know they are not sheep, and he was not a literal shepherd.
"wages pretty much everywhere in the bible are referenced per day so that’s a reasonable assumption" - well, no, not when it says he worked for a month, and did the work of three "shepherds".
"If you can come up with a better guess, have at it."
Yes - it's at least the wages of 3 people for a month. But remember this is not someone looking after sheep; it's someone looking after the people of Israel. "The flock detested me, and I grew weary of them and said, “I will not be your shepherd. Let the dying die, and the perishing perish. Let those who are left eat one another’s flesh.”"
"Even if you can’t it’s pretty safe to assume it was a relatively trivial sum of money or the made up story doesn’t work so well."
So, not so trivial.
Neither you nor I care about an estimate of what in the bible is verifiable history, what is plausible, what its BS, and what is metaphor, so we're not going to look into that. I just want trolling OPs to be better quality.
= new reply since forum marked as read