Who would employ this lot.........US apparently
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 57

Thread: Who would employ this lot.........US apparently

  1. #1
    Superfreak!!! Dragonsreach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Bolton, Lancs, UK (A Geordie in Exile)
    Posts
    17,305
    Rep Power
    38

    Default Who would employ this lot.........US apparently

    Can you imagine working for a company that has a little more than 600 employees and has the following employee statistics:

    29 have been accused of spouse abuse

    7 have been arrested for fraud

    9 have been accused of writing bad cheques

    17 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses

    3 have done time for assault

    71 cannot get a credit card .

    14 have been arrested on drug-related charges

    8 have been arrested for shop-lifting

    21 are currently defendants in lawsuits

    84 have been arrested for drink driving in the last year


    Which organisation is this?










    It’s the 635 members of the House of Commons, the same group that cranks out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in the UK in line.



  2. #2

    Default

    I thought that by US you meant United States, turns out that\'s England?

    I will admit that I would not be surprised if those statistics were about American politicians too. :D lol

    -Matt

  3. #3

    Default

    Originally posted by mattsterbenz
    ... turns out that\'s England?
    UK, not England! :P

    I thought you meant the US too, Mike!

  4. #4

    Default

    yeah i thought he meant the us. disturbing stuff but hardly surprising. all a bunch of liars

  5. #5

    Default

    Also, not to be a smart arse or anything, but shouldn\'t it be \".......WE apparently\"? :]

  6. #6

    Default

    Originally posted by Ritual
    Also, not to be a smart arse or anything, but shouldn\'t it be \".......WE apparently\"? :]
    \"We do, apparently.\"

    *Fixed* :D lol

    -Matt

  7. #7

    Default

    Actually, the correct way would be \"We would, apparently.\"

  8. #8

    Default

    \"Do\" would also work, I believe.

    For example:

    \"Would you ever eat McDonalds?\"
    \"I do, actually. All the time.\"

    Everyone on the internet should have become an editor at a publishing company! :D

    -Matt

  9. #9

    Default

    The important thing, as I see it, is that Mike was wrong! lol

  10. #10
    Superfreak!!! Dragonsreach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Bolton, Lancs, UK (A Geordie in Exile)
    Posts
    17,305
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    Originally posted by Ritual
    The important thing, as I see it, is that Mike was wrong! lol
    Nope. Both usages of an inclusive collective such as either US or WE (as in We do) are correct.

    However in this context the informal Us is probably the more effecive use for ironic tinbre.:rolleyes: lol

    What is incorrect however is the beeding missing comma between Us and apparently. Flaming dyslexic keyboard. lol

  11. #11

    Default

    But, \"us\" is an objective pronoun, isn\'t it? Should be on the \"receiving end\" of a verb, or am I missing some finer subtleties of the English language? :innocent:

  12. #12
    Superfreak!!! Dragonsreach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Bolton, Lancs, UK (A Geordie in Exile)
    Posts
    17,305
    Rep Power
    38

    Default

    By subtlies you really mean informal sloppy usage. lol

    (Guilty on that charge )

  13. #13

    Default

    Something like that, yes. lol

  14. #14

    Default

    Wow...the ADD on this forum is astounding.

    it\'s like:

    \"I can\'t believe these dirty scoundrels in the House of....hey look....a butterfly\" lol

  15. #15

    Default

    I just happen to take grammar very seriously, that\'s all! :] lol

  16. #16

    Default

    Where the frick did that butterfly go?


    Anyhow, I\'ve received the same exact email with the numbers adjusted to get the 435 US representives number.

    Aint that the shits?

    (suck on that grammar cops!)

  17. #17

    Default

    Originally posted by supervike
    Where the frick did that butterfly go?


    Anyhow, I\'ve received the same exact email with the numbers adjusted to get the 435 US representives number.

    Aint that the shits?

    (suck on that grammar cops!)
    I remember seeing something about this on Snopes, actually. The link is here.

  18. #18

    Default

    Originally posted by supervike
    Where the frick did that butterfly go?


    Anyhow, I\'ve received the same exact email with the numbers adjusted to get the 435 US representives number.

    Aint that the shits?

    (suck on that grammar cops!)
    Bugger, so we\'re saying this is all made up?

    Actually, i thought it was nonsense that we\'d be able to access that information, so it\'s no shock...I just wanted it to be true :(

  19. #19

    Default

    Originally posted by mattsterbenz
    \"Do\" would also work, I believe.

    For example:

    \"Would you ever eat McDonalds?\"
    \"I do, actually. All the time.\"

    Everyone on the internet should have become an editor at a publishing company! :D

    -Matt
    Oi! No stealing my job! :moon:

  20. #20

    Default

    Originally posted by reverend
    Bugger, so we\'re saying this is all made up?
    Actually EVERYTHING is made up.

    It\'s a fact that nothing is true.

    Let\'s get back to that butterfly.....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Privacy Policy  |   Terms and Conditions  |   Contact Us  |   The Legion


Copyright © 2001-2018 CMON Inc.

-->