<p>How comical that you chose to ignore the latter half of my post. Seeing as you could not identify your own mistake even upon my suggestions, how do these two sentences look to you? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Seeing as you edited the ‘latter half’ of your post after I posted my response, I find it comical that you struggle to keep up with my well-aimed attacks. BTW, ‘majority’ is the subject, and is singular…therefore ‘is’ is the correct verb. Nice try though</p>
<p>
[majority</a> are/majority is](<a href=“http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/majority.html]majority”>majority are / majority is | Common Errors in English Usage and More | Washington State University)</p>
<p>OK so it goes both ways…what’s your point?</p>
<p>When you use majority to refer to a collection of individuals, such as “the majority of people eating here” or “the majority of men sitting here”, it is treated as plural.</p>
<p>It also says whichever verb you choose is unlikely to “bother many people”…so why don’t you go out tonight with some “friends” if you have any instead of searching in google for support for an argument about grammar.</p>
<p>Resorting to ad hominem attacks again, with a touch of hypocrisy too. I’ll leave you alone now.</p>
<p>Here’s another mistake SayWhat.?
</p>
<p>It’s “there” not “their.”</p>
<p>And I am not a Republican. Nor a Democrat.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You probably don’t want to say that when I’m around, because I bet I could tear your posts apart and find dozens. :)</p>
<p>Hey SayWhat?, when I read your posts, that’s exactly what I say (“what?”). </p>
<p>By the way, I like how you use ad hominem attacks. They really make your argument credible and persuasive.</p>
<p>This is CRAZY!!!</p>
<p>Why do you say crazy stalker?</p>
<p>So according to you, all of the exceptionally intelligent people of the world should don a white labcoat and live their lives researching and studying for the sole purpose of “helping society”, with their only reward being a wonderful 5 figure government salary? Yah right… capitalism is king and all technological advancements in society are made in hopes of gaining a profit in some way, shape, or form. Get real, you sound like a d*** commie.</p>
<p>And SayWhat, if you’re going to use all the fancy vocabulary and play the too-intelligent-for-those-ignorant-republicans card, maybe you should learn to write correctly and coherently so that you don’t illegitimize yourself even further.</p>
<p>i-banks add a certain value to society, but the main goal on their agenda is maximizing profits for their own firms. Any financial services to society come as a side benefit to profits. Take GS for example. 70% of their profits come from trading (aka blatant market manipulation with the kind of money they have), while <20% come from true financial services.</p>
<p>Generally, Wall Street is extremely indifferent toward the general populace; the kind of culture that pervades the Street today is a make-money-24/7-thru-any-means-possible trader culture. </p>
<p>The Street’s prevailing manipulation and exploitation of both companies and the stock market do nothing to add value to society and are for the sole purpose of squeezing money out of people’s pockets.</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, I personally have nothing against I-banking, I might even want to work in the field one day (lol am I a hypocrite?). But i just think, for the most part, i-banks don’t add as much value to society as much as we’d like them.</p>
<p>That’s my 2 cents.</p>
<p>Investment banks provide necessary services. If the industry lacks a sense of responsiblity and a sense of civic duty, the best way to correct that is to jump in, I think. “Be the change” as they say. Demonizing them certainly isn’t gonna fix anything.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Bankers will suck up to whoever’s in power. See: Goldman and Obama.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe in capitalism yet I can’t help but find this fetishizing of the profit motive gross.</p>
<p>Hahaha this is great guys keep it coming (and btw, your grammar attacks do just as little damage as my ad hominem attacks, at least in regards to the actual arguments sake…sorry I didnt realize I had to point that out…but I digress)</p>
<p>There’s nothing wrong with smart people wanting to go into i-banking… if you like econ, then you probably are aware that it is best for people to take jobs where they will add the most value.</p>
<p>Naturally, if an individual is more attracted to investment banking than other professions, and if that individual believes he or she will provide more value in investment banking than in a lab or hospital, than it is best for him/her to work in an investment bank.</p>
<p>Personally, I know I have one life to live and I’m not going to spend it doing something I have no interest in doing simply to ‘better society’, because I know that there are thousands of other people who are interested in taking those jobs (researchers, doctors, statisticians, etc).</p>
<p>SayWhat: stop generalizing and picking pointless fights…</p>
<p>“Clearly the majority of people posting on this thread is full of self-serving republicans with wealthy parents who indulge in a materialistic culture. They go to desperate measures to justify their actions with false arguments and carefully contrived rationale, but i digress…”</p>
<p>Why don’t you explain what you’re accusing us of?</p>
<p>
So you just admitted that your previous arguments were basically useless. That wasn’t so hard, was it?</p>
<p>Hahahahaha. SayWhat? is rather entertaining, and hopelessly stupid. Hahaha.</p>
<p>SayWhat? is a ■■■■■. Do not feed it.</p>