BxBarracuda 
|
So there is going to be an age recession, is nothing safe?
Talk about your fun facts, thanks SMW.
Reply #861. Oct 26 10, 6:34 AM
|
leelee63
|
44 million adults in the U.S. can't read well enough to read a simple story to a child.
That is about 10% of the U.S. population. A disgrace. Perhaps this is a good subject to address about Unions and the importance of re-qualification for teaching positions rather than tenure. Make sure the best qualified are hired.
47 percent will pay no federal income taxes
Most because they have the frame of mind that the country owes them (ask you know who's Aunt), or they are illiterate, or don't work, in jail, or are illegal and send the money to their home countries.
85% of Americans angry about the economy
As they should be.
95 percent of Americans believe in God
Sounds a bit high of a number to me, although 72 virgins waiting seems high, too.
100 percent will probably think”what is the point of useless statistics anyway”?
and I'm sure 99% of people know that 100% of statistics are just numbers. But what percentage or chance is it that this response will be the one that gets censured, rather than #860?
Reply #862. Oct 27 10, 4:41 AM
|
boxjaw
|
Do these statistical numbers come from all kinds of different sources? Can they be confirmed? Statistical percentages are a crap shoot these days. Every interest group holds a pair of loaded dice.
Reply #863. Oct 27 10, 7:03 AM
|
| daydodo
|
"Over 50% of NASA employees are dyslexic." Does that mean they never went to the Moon but sent the astronauts to Nome in Alaska instead?
Reply #865. Oct 27 10, 10:34 AM
|
Cymruambyth
|
It seems that a surpringly high number of very bright people are dyslexic, and I would imagine that NASA employees are very bright people.
Reply #866. Oct 28 10, 1:00 AM
|
| REDVIKING57
|
My brother is/was dyslexic and left school at 15,barely able to read and write. He worked in semi-skilled and manual jobs until he was 23,and was a millionaire before he was 30. He now makes The Sunday Times' annual 'UK's Richest 500 List'. If personal wealth is your terms of reference,he is very bright!
Reply #867. Oct 28 10, 10:04 AM
|
Cymruambyth
|
Congratulations to your brother. His brightness would depend on how he made that million, wouldn't it? If he won the lottery, not so much, but if he invented something that brought the cash rolling in then good for him. However, I also know a few not-so-bright people who could buy and sell most of us without noticing a dent in their bank balances. Most of them inherited their wealth, though. Rich doesn't necessarily equate with bright!
Reply #868. Oct 28 10, 11:30 AM
|
| lesley153
|
Well done, Paul's brother! How did he make his fortune, and does he occasionally walk past his old school and thumb his nose at it (or get the butler to do it for him)?
Reply #869. Oct 28 10, 11:52 AM
|
honeybee4
|
My oldest son's first wife was dyslexic and spent far too much time putting herself down because of it. I always found her one of the brightest women I have ever talked to.
Reply #870. Oct 28 10, 12:08 PM
|
| REDVIKING57
|
Cym - "His brightness would depend on how he made that million,wouldn't it".
Why? Provided it was legal and ethical? And,no,he was not born into wealth - quite the opposite,actually. Given that he worked,from the age of 15,in manual and semi-skilled jobs,that's a reasonable assumption,really. No,he didn't win the lottery,or football pools,or any other form of gambling. And he didn't steal it,either. Or get it from inventing,advertising or preaching to others - he worked hard for his money. Maybe unfashionable or considered a little tacky in some circles,but necessary none the less.
Perhaps my point was missed? That being that dyslexia,or a serious lack of academic success,does not preclude achievement in life. Just the same as a good and privileged education does not guarantee it. Even if it engenders a 'holier-than-thou' attitude in some.
BTW - I'll pass on your 'congratulations' to my brother. I'm sure he'll be chuffed.
Reply #873. Oct 29 10, 1:05 PM
|
supersal1
|
The very thought!
Reminds me of the remake of 'St Trinians' a few years ago. The girls were shown distilling vodka strong enough to fell a horse, manufacturing drugs, causing explosions and nicking a work of art. However, they weren't allowed to be shown smoking.
Reply #875. Oct 29 10, 4:23 PM
|
Christinap
|
Apart from the stupidity of suing a child of that age to start with, what sort of damages can they get from her. All her pocket-money until she's 16 or something.
Reply #877. Oct 30 10, 8:00 AM
|
| REDVIKING57
|
Perhaps they'll make her sell her bike? And crash helmet?
Reply #878. Oct 30 10, 8:14 AM
|
| REDVIKING57
|
Just had a thought (yes,just one!) :
"I'll get you,my pretty! And your little dog,too!"
Reply #879. Oct 30 10, 8:46 AM
|
| lesley153
|
Oh dear - there are adolescents, and probably adults, who can't understand cause and effect. This four-nearly-five-year-old may well have understood but would she have the coordination to ride her bike into, or to swerve to avoid, a human target? Are there laws against riding a bike on pavements, and do they apply to children?
It wasn't even a bike. It was a training bike! They're not the nippiest of vehicles, are they?
Please can we have input from someone who knows about American law. In Britain, I'm pretty sure that the case would be laughed out of court. In America, a decision of guilt may be held against her until she's got some money worth having. Yes, that'll really help the 87-year-old who died. Her son will probably be dead by then too.
Reply #880. Oct 30 10, 9:42 AM
|
|
This thread has been closed to new replies.
|
Legal / Conditions of Use
|
Play Now! 
: 
