On 3/08/2020 11:06 pm, wrote:
OK - let us discuss the "British U" such as in colo u r and so forth. Which has been around for a very long time. But for the purposes of this specious argument, let us agree on 300 years as an arbitrary figure.
a) Each printed U takes up space on paper, ink, space on the printing plate and so forth.
b) That space has an associated cost. Again, being arbitrary, let us agree that each one hundred Us are worth one British penny, then and now.
c) I believe that it would be fair to suggest that at least a billion extra Us were printed per year since 1700.

https://www.officialdata.org/us/inflation/1700?amount=1

That first year would be £417 in 1700 (240 pence to the pound). Over the last 300 years, the average earned interest rate is about 4.5%.
Just for giggles, let us use that same £417 as a periodic deposit for the same 300 years. That is highly conservative as that £417 would be more like £26,271 today.



Care to guess what those Us cost the British and Brit-speak economies over the last 300 years?

https://www.calculator.net/future-va...it=0&x=52&y=13

$5,259,278,881.34 And that is only if the first-cost is *as little as * £417 *.

And you dare to criticize American spelling?

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA


**Let's add all those idiotic American words, like 'burglarize' (the
correct word is 'burgle' (that is a phenomenal FOUR extra letters for
the idiotic American spelling), 'anethesiologist', rather than the
correct 'anaesthetist' and so on. Americans tend to use a lot of surplus
words to describe simple things. 'Absolutely' rather than 'yes' springs
to mind.

Plug that into your calculator.

One concession I will make to Americans' desire to make words simpler is
that surrounding the pronunciation of 'lieutenant'. The American
pronunciation does make sense.

-

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus