Flag dynamics

[morqthana]

But you haven't answered my question

I take it you haven't seen the news reports of the hamas personel flying the same flag you display alongside their headbands.

Actually, I genuinely haven't.

 

[morqthana]

No, I certainly do not, but flying a flag which supports Hamas, is doing you and your cause absolutely no favours at all.

The flag of the state of Palestine does not "support Hamas".

You really don't have the wherewithal to participate properly in this discussion, do you, as you either cannot, or deliberately refuse to, be truthful.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Actually, I genuinely haven't.

The flag of the state of Palestine does not "support Hamas".

Well, which is it, it cannot be both?

 

[Munroast]

looks like a terrorists flag to me - I find it offensive

 

[aveatry]

The flag of the state of Palestine does not "support Hamas".

Its a proxy

 

[SUNRAY]

Presumably the incorrect answer people were giving was £100?

It certainly is a very common answer and when I give the answer I automatically give the explanation to fend off the disputees

 

[SUNRAY]

Indeed so - but the point I was making was not only that but, rather, that the extent to which one would be 'disappointed'would depend upon the order in which the three discounts had been applied.

It is in the seller's interests to first apply the largest discount and then to move down the progressively lower ones - but the opposite order would leave the buyer less 'disappointed'

100 - 10% (10) = 90, 90 - 20% (18) = 72, 72 - 30% (21.6) = 50.4
100 - 30% (30) = 70, 70 - 20% (14) = 56, 56 -10% (5.6) = 50.4

100 * 0.9 * 0.8 * 0.7 = 50.4


100 - 5% (5) = 95, 95 - 10% (9.5) = 85.5, 85.5 - 50% (42.75) = 42.75
100 - 50% (50) = 50, 50 - 10% (5) = 45, 45 - 5% (2.25) = 42.75

100 * 0.95 * 0.9 * 0.5 = 42.75


What am I doing wrong?

Equally
100+10%+20%+30% = 100+30%+20%+10% = 171.6
100+5%+10%+50% = 100+50%+10%+5% = 173.25

 

[SUNRAY]

The flag of the state of Palestine does not "support Hamas".

hamas goes fly the flag of Palestine
You can't have it both ways.

 

[Risteard]

It is often said that the 'best' form of government would be a "benevolent dictatorship". However, the problem is that, essentially by definition, if one has a dictatorship one has no choice (nor any prior knowledge) of who the dictator is, or how 'benevolent' he/she is ... and, looking around, many/most of the most obvious dictatorships in the world are probably anything but 'benevolent'

Yes indeed, I love the term benevolt dictator.

 

[JohnW2]

Yes indeed, I love the term benevolt dictator.

...but you presumably don't "love" all [maybe not (m)any] dictators who exist, or have existed, around the world, do you?

 

[morqthana]

So - let me see if I've got this right. This appears to be the position of a lot of people here.

This is the flag of a recognised state:

It is not the flag of a terrorist organisation. It is not part of or the basis of a flag of a terrorist organisation. It is flown by some terrorists.

These are the flags of a recognised state and a component nation:

They are the flags of, or parts/basis of flags of, violent right wing and proscribed terrorist organisations. They are flown by some violent right wing people and terrorists.

It is not OK for people to fly the first flag, even though it is not the flag of or part of or the basis of a flag of a terrorist organisation, because the fact that it is flown by some terrorists means that any flying of it expresses support for terrorists.

It is OK for people to fly either of the other two flags even though they are the flag of or part of or the basis of the flags of terrorist organisations and violent right wing groups, because the fact that they are flown by terrorists and violent right groups does not mean that any flying of them expresses support for terrorists or violent right wing groups.

I'm struggling to see any logic or consistency, or anything except bigotry, in those positions.

 

[morqthana]

looks like a terrorists flag to me

You're not very good at looking then. Is there any training you could go on to get better at it?

 

[JohnD]

Its a proxy

In the same way that terrorists and genocidal racists fly the Israeli flag, and wear the star of David.

looks like a terrorists flag to me - I find it offensive

Yes, I can see how that might happen.

 

[aveatry]

Its a proxy

In the same way that genocidal racists fly the Israeli flag, and wear the star of David.

So you agree its a proxy then - got it.

 

[JohnW2]

100 - 10% (10) = 90, 90 - 20% (18) = 72, 72 - 30% (21.6) = 50.4
100 - 30% (30) = 70, 70 - 20% (14) = 56, 56 -10% (5.6) = 50.4
100 * 0.9 * 0.8 * 0.7 = 50.4
What am I doing wrong?

Nothing
You are obviously correct.

I've quite often seen the assertion which I made, but I clearly have never bothered to think about the maths - since, as you illustrate, the assertion is clearly not correct.

I presumably never thought about the maths ('did the sums') because, without thought, the assertion sounded quite 'credible' - similar, I suspect, to the way in which morqthana probably 'thought' that it would make a difference whether an increase/decrease ws applied before or after addition of VAT.

So, apologies for the confusion - but it is an illustration of how easy it is for myths to be perpetuated if they sound fairly credible!!