Play Nice 45th President of the United States: Donald Trump - Part 6 - It begins. (cont in pt 7)

[Ned_Flanders]

Warren fell right into Trump's trap.

Releasing just how little Native American blood she has will be huge material against her if she runs in 2020.

She won't run. She lacks enough support in the party overall, and is a pretty one dimensional candidate

 

[Financialpanther]

She won't run. She lacks enough support in the party overall, and is a pretty one dimensional candidate

Agree with this - she will become a distracting punchline unfortunately given how Trump has treated her so far.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

No one in their right mind thinks that 0.1% counts.

She has less Indian DNA than the average white American. And she used that status to get an affirmative action position with Harvard, meaning an actual native American missed out.

DNA tests don't test for ethnicity. It's the biggest con job being pushed in recent years by the ancestory orgs.

What they do is profile aspects of your DNA against sampling that has been done for each specific ethnicity

A few problems arise from this.

Firstly, sampling is only as strong as the sample size and it's level of representation. Reality is these tests develop a database through a combo of some uni research, but more and more the punters who pay for these tests. This means you are getting massive samples of some groups, weaker of others.

Secondly there is no "standard". A standard is something like a pure reference sample you can compare your test result against. Noone is pure, so we are dealing with tainted samples already.

Finally the math. Most DNA tests don't test the entire thing, only testing a small amount of it because that is all that's needed in most cases. I don't know if this pattern follows in ancestory tests, but I wouldn't be surprised. Point is, if you're only analysing part of the data your missing potential details that could be telling.

This stuff is fun, and indicative, but that's it. I personally think people treat them however as far more absolute than they actually are

 

[madmug]

Tax rates where it causes individuals and businesses to differ or avoid investment. We are currently ok in Australia but even still when you start paying half your earnings to the government you start to look for loopholes. You i presume are a proponent of globalisation (free markets, openish borders) but you seem to take it in isolation. You can't have big welfare without high tax, in a global economy tax havens exist and are plenty easy to take advantage of so once tax becomes to burdensome and it is a different amount for everyone people look to avoid it, that is the reason governments leave loopholes for the 1% to reduce their real tax rate.

Businesses modeled on reducing Tax, &/or wages are really a burden on society.

The tax argument is quite complex. The argument that less is always better is just a race to the bottom. Just look at the US & the problem with decaying infrastructure. Let alone poorly run & funded education & health systems. The resultant outcomes are clear & detrimental to the society as a whole. It really is a miserable place for many people.

Poor countries have that problem for a reason. Rich ones do because of individual & corporate greed.

So do we need to follow that race to the bottom?

Mathias Corman's 'mantra' is just ignorant & self serving BS & not backed up by him with any facts.

What do you think would be the reason for the close correlation of Happiest nations with Highest tax?

So apart from greed & ignorance, why wouldn't we tax at least our current, relatively low rate, attack tax avoiding multinationals & local businesses & go after tax havens?

Surely that would give society a far better outcome?

Genuine interest.

 

[Father Jack]

Lol - Half of Europe s population has 1/1000 Native American Indian dna! You probably have more!
Trolled into lunacy

interesting that the 1/1000th number was the upper range of the estimate, the lower was something like 1/32nd, and yet we only hear the upper range number from you and your ilk.

 

[Chief]

This stuff is fun, and indicative, but that's it. I personally think people treat them however as far more absolute than they actually are

Should come with a "for entertainment purposes and pharma industry profits only".



https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/white-supremacists-respond-genetics-say-theyre-not-white

 

[Werewolf]

What is the 'deep state'?

The Whitehouse set limits to an investigation by the FBI over a man of power. Isn't that 'Deep state'?

What is your definition of what you believe 'deep state' is?

I could come up with my own definition, but in the meantime Kennedy refers to it in this speech from 1961:



The investigation didn't seem thorough, but maybe they know stuff that we don't? We can only speculate.

Do you support it or not?

Why did you bring up abortion, when I never mentioned it?

I think it's a reasonable explanation if you consider executive orders 13823 and 13825. Presumably they have a specific purpose.

There's concern that abortion in the US will be outlawed. That's how I took to mean about 'pushing their agenda'.

When is an OK time for her to have raised the sexual assault allegation?

When is it not OK for an alleged victim to seek justice?

I can understand not lodging a report at the time, but BK has had a public profile for over a decade. I'm not saying he's innocent, the fact is we don't know. I also posted that Trump could've nominated a qualified woman to avoid this, but maybe BK was required.

A genuine victim can seek justice whenever they want, but preferably ASAP. Memories degrade over time.

 

[Satan]

“rhetorical hyperbole” judges view of a trump tweet , standby for more of them

 

[FireKrakouer]

DNA tests don't test for ethnicity. It's the biggest con job being pushed in recent years by the ancestory orgs.

What they do is profile aspects of your DNA against sampling that has been done for each specific ethnicity

A few problems arise from this.

Firstly, sampling is only as strong as the sample size and it's level of representation. Reality is these tests develop a database through a combo of some uni research, but more and more the punters who pay for these tests. This means you are getting massive samples of some groups, weaker of others.

Secondly there is no "standard". A standard is something like a pure reference sample you can compare your test result against. Noone is pure, so we are dealing with tainted samples already.

Finally the math. Most DNA tests don't test the entire thing, only testing a small amount of it because that is all that's needed in most cases. I don't know if this pattern follows in ancestory tests, but I wouldn't be surprised. Point is, if you're only analysing part of the data your missing potential details that could be telling.

This stuff is fun, and indicative, but that's it. I personally think people treat them however as far more absolute than they actually are

This is true. I got an ancestry.com test as a gift about 2 years ago. I didn't expect a $100 test to be perfectly accurate, but the regions it came up with were roughly as I expected. I decided to log back in and check on my lunch break just now, and the site said "we only had 3000 references to check when you first submitted your info, now we have 16000. Here's your updated info". The regions seemed to be consistent, but the percentage from each region had changed significantly, one from 20% to 48%. So they really had nfi 2 years ago, and probably still don't.

Now I learn my DNA is being sold to marketing companies so that they can sell me genetically appropriate wine, fml.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

This is true. I got an ancestry.com test as a gift about 2 years ago. I didn't expect a $100 test to be perfectly accurate, but the regions it came up with were roughly as I expected. I decided to log back in and check on my lunch break just now, and the site said "we only had 3000 references to check when you first submitted your info, now we have 16000. Here's your updated info". The regions seemed to be consistent, but the percentage from each region had changed significantly, one from 20% to 48%. So they really had nfi 2 years ago, and probably still don't.

Now I learn my DNA is being sold to marketing companies so that they can sell me genetically appropriate wine, fml.

Wine isn't the worry

Insurance companies are

I believe it's still legal for insurance companies to discriminate against you on the grounds of DNA test results

 

[FireKrakouer]

Wine isn't the worry

Insurance companies are

I believe it's still legal for insurance companies to discriminate against you on the grounds of DNA test results

I recall reading the Ts and Cs at the time and they claimed that they don't share data with 3rd parties... maybe there was some loophole in the fine print somewhere. Can't see it being a problem with insurance in Aus, fingers crossed anyway.

I have heard cases of criminals being busted for serious crimes via their relatives uploading DNA to these sites and police narrowing down the perp to that family. Guess if any of my cousins are serial killers, they're screwed now. There's a couple who I wouldn't be surprised about!

 

[yebiga]

The release of Warrens dna test results only prove she is a walking joke

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I recall reading the Ts and Cs at the time and they claimed that they don't share data with 3rd parties... maybe there was some loophole in the fine print somewhere. Can't see it being a problem with insurance in Aus, fingers crossed anyway.

I have heard cases of criminals being busted for serious crimes via their relatives uploading DNA to these sites and police narrowing down the perp to that family. Guess if any of my cousins are serial killers, they're screwed now. There's a couple who I wouldn't be surprised about!

Last I heard it's worse here

Insurance companies added a clause that if you get a DNA test done anywhere in the world, it's considered equivalent to prior diagnosis, so they can reject your claim UNLESS you provide them with the DNA data when you were tested

 

[FireKrakouer]

Last I heard it's worse here

Insurance companies added a clause that if you get a DNA test done anywhere in the world, it's considered equivalent to prior diagnosis, so they can reject your claim UNLESS you provide them with the DNA data when you were tested

I use my Medibank cover frequently, and have never even been asked about pre existing conditions, let alone DNA tests. They let me claim anything without question thus far. Hopefully it stays this way, who knows.

 

[Todman]

 

[Chief]

DNA tests don't test for ethnicity. It's the biggest con job being pushed in recent years by the ancestory orgs.

What they do is profile aspects of your DNA against sampling that has been done for each specific ethnicity

A few problems arise from this.

Firstly, sampling is only as strong as the sample size and it's level of representation. Reality is these tests develop a database through a combo of some uni research, but more and more the punters who pay for these tests. This means you are getting massive samples of some groups, weaker of others.

Secondly there is no "standard". A standard is something like a pure reference sample you can compare your test result against. Noone is pure, so we are dealing with tainted samples already.

Finally the math. Most DNA tests don't test the entire thing, only testing a small amount of it because that is all that's needed in most cases. I don't know if this pattern follows in ancestory tests, but I wouldn't be surprised. Point is, if you're only analysing part of the data your missing potential details that could be telling.

This stuff is fun, and indicative, but that's it. I personally think people treat them however as far more absolute than they actually are

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/white-supremacists-respond-genetics-say-theyre-not-white

A study by 23andMe reported that with their definition of European ancestry, there is an average of 98.6 percent European ancestry among self-reported European-Americans. But given all I’ve said, we should digest this with caution,” Novembre said. “An individual with 100 percent European ancestry tests is simply someone who looks very much like the European reference samples being used.”

Though ancestry companies cite research that claims genetic tests can pinpoint someone within 100 miles of their European ancestral home, that’s not always the case. Marks offered the recent example of three blond triplets who took an ancestry test for the TV show The Doctors. The test said the triplets were 99 percent European. But one sister had more English and Irish ancestry, while another had more French and German. Did we mention they are identical triplets?

“That shows you just how much slop there is in these kinds of of ancestry estimates,” Marks said.

 

[Ripper]

Anyone here contribute to the fund?

 

[Chief]

Yeah but he still ****ed her.

 

[Todman]

Yeah but he still ****** her.

You would to if she was waiting in your hotel room wearing lingerie and you were still young enough to perform.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Anyone here contribute to the fund?

Chief has a premium pornhub account, does that count?

 

[Satan]

Chief has a premium pornhub account, does that count?

Chief bought it after the Essendon drug saga board went gangbusters

 

[tandino]

So her real name isn't even Stormy Daniels?

 

[Poor Form]

Businesses modeled on reducing Tax, &/or wages are really a burden on society.

The tax argument is quite complex. The argument that less is always better is just a race to the bottom. Just look at the US & the problem with decaying infrastructure. Let alone poorly run & funded education & health systems. The resultant outcomes are clear & detrimental to the society as a whole. It really is a miserable place for many people.

Poor countries have that problem for a reason. Rich ones do because of individual & corporate greed.

So do we need to follow that race to the bottom?

Mathias Corman's 'mantra' is just ignorant & self serving BS & not backed up by him with any facts.

What do you think would be the reason for the close correlation of Happiest nations with Highest tax?

So apart from greed & ignorance, why wouldn't we tax at least our current, relatively low rate, attack tax avoiding multinationals & local businesses & go after tax havens?

Surely that would give society a far better outcome?

Genuine interest.

Yeah i agree that you can't just race to the bottom, but you also can't go after tax havens without international agreement. So you find a happy medium the US had relatively high corporate tax rates 35% i think it was and this resulted in massive evasion by big business, i think there is a tension point where they will pay tax maybe it is 15% maybe it is 10% but a point at which the cost of evading (political, PR, accounting etc) ends up being more than the saving. So Australia can't go after multinationals ourselves for the fact that they will just produce overseas and import here, hence Trumps tariffs are part of forcing big business back into producing in the US. You point to the US decaying infrastructure, social systems etc. those fell into those situations with their previous tax rates and laws not lowered rates we are seeing today.

Our rate is pretty much average for developed nations but that doesn't help when bigger industrial nations are operating with taxes at 15% or lower and we allow anybody to import into Australia with minimum protections.

I think you are looking at those high tax nations over a short term, they are very high standard of living at the upper end due to years of capitalism building a national wealth like few others. Now they have a welfare system that helps those left behind but they are quickly running out of money and I predict many high income earners will be evading tax or leaving altogether if things don't change. There is a reason that those governments are loathe to allow themselves to be labled socialists in spite of sharing many characteristics with socialists.

 

[yebiga]

interesting that the 1/1000th number was the upper range of the estimate, the lower was something like 1/32nd, and yet we only hear the upper range number from you and your ilk.

Reckon she is at least 1/32 parts natively stupid
And 31/32 parts culturally insane.

 

[Werewolf]