eBay

lyhargr_0 · ‎03-01-2020

Grabbing a woman's arm and making her shake his hand when she didnt want to do it, was NOT a good look, it's called assault .... If he had done it to me, I would have had him charged with assault. He has NO right to do this to anyone

He also did to one of firies, he got up and walked out in disgust, cant say I blame him

He needs to learn to keep his hands to himself

myoclon1cjerk · ‎26-01-2020

Mis-reporting in the Murdoch press? Never.

k1ooo-slr-sales · ‎26-01-2020

@domino-710 wrote:
Percentages, decimals and fractions
A specific value can be represented as a percentage, decimal or fraction. These are different ways of showing the same value. The following table shows some examples.
Fraction, decimal and percent values. Fraction Decimal Percent 1/100 0.01 1% 1/20 0.05 5% 1/10 0.1 10% 1/5 0.2 20% 1/4 0.25 25% 1/3 0.3333... 33.33...% 1/2 0.5 50% 3/4 0.75 75% 4/5 0.8 80% 9/10 0.9 90% 1 100%

Fraction 1/100

Decimal 0.01

Percent 1%

So, in your earlier post you used .01% . . . which is where you went wrong.

You should have used either 0.01 OR 1% as 0.01% is one-hundredth of 1%

the_great_she_elephant · ‎26-01-2020

@domino-710 wrote:
It could well be - but that big a misprint.

the Red Cross has declared a maximum of one cent in every dollar raised will be used for this purpose.

This was stated for diaster relief.

I was only going by the quoted post.

This article in The Guardian states up to 10%

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/24/australian-red-cross-defends-spending-10-of-b...

On Thursday, the charity conceded that up to 10% of all donations would be set aside for office costs, claiming that it had always been upfront about this figure.

domino-710 · ‎26-01-2020

Understood - said I was no Einstein at maths.

domino-710 · ‎26-01-2020

That also is understood - but 2 different articles.

One stating 10% the other 1%.

I simply find $11,500,000 - of the 115 miliion donated - for Fire Disaster - since last July - questionable.

tezza2844 · ‎26-01-2020

Here is a bit of look as to why SoMo/Scott from Ad/Liar from the shire denial of climate change may a more sinister foundation:

Many Pentecostals believe that the only entity capable of affecting climate change is God. Therefore, anthropogenic (man-made) climate change doesn’t exist. Putting measures in place to address climate change would, therefore, be a waste of time and money and interfering with God’s will. Further, many adherents believe that resources were put on Earth by God for humans to use — such as timber from trees, coal and oil. If one holds this belief, then not utilising those God-given resources would be an insult to God. Clearly, this is one of the core influences in Scott Morrison’s climate change denialism and his profound unwillingness to give up fossil fuels.

https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/wrens-week-scott-morrisons-pentecostal-be...

It may also explain his reluctance to adequately staff the NDIS office