Teh Ricer Civic!

+1 I hate people that turn everything into a racial issue. Political Correctness is the worst possible disease ever to have spread throughout the civilized world.

But in the exact same situation, if i asked say an Asian that very question, it would not be questionable?

Lol, now if we called them Latin American Restaurants, is that acceptable? "Hey its the disabled man!" UNACCEPTABLE "Hey its the man with the disability!" ACCEPTABLE! Now, i personally love both fried chicken and watermelons. So if i was going out to get these things for myself, would it be inappropriate for me to ask an African American if they would like me to get some for them too? and the one about the LGBT community I don't even get this one. when someone comes out of the closet your response is supposed to be "Thank you"???????????

What is this 'humor'? some sort of bodily fluid?

I don't think Humans are an ethnicity. They are a race however. eth⋅nic⋅i⋅ty    /ɛθˈnɪsɪti/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [eth-nis-i-tee] Show IPA –noun, plural -ties. 1. ethnic traits, background, allegiance, or association. 2. an ethnic group: Representatives of several ethnicities were present. So clearly my statement as "American" for an ethnicity would have to be acceptable.

Speaking of stuff like this, i remember on some survey it was what ethnicity are you or something to that extent. I checked the other box and wrote "American". I wonder what they lumped me in with after that...

2 things: 1) since when was being an armed robber a occupation? Unless i guess your hired by the government to go rob other countries banks... or if your an IRS agent 2) are you implying that females are not good at armed robbery?

So its perfectly alright if i went up to a white guy and said, "hey honkey, you the new guy?" I mean it doesn't say not to say it

Well Porsche owned like 75% of VW... that's control over VW. Porsche probably didn't want to either buy out the remaining equity or was doing it for some other financial reason.

Ah this reminds me of old C&G lobby threads.

And one you Dodgefan types might like...

Ill call you Radio Nurse Technician or RNT for short. Then i will make fun of how your made up name sounds like RENT which was a terrible movie.

You realize that you would lose like NOTHING in a reverse split right? Ill do a little Finance 101 to clear up some misconceptions about stock splits. IN a 2:1 reverse split (which i really doubt Ford would do, they seem to like keeping their shares priced low). All that means is that for every 2 stocks you own, you receive 1 stock back. In the end your ownership & value of your 1 share is the same as the value of your 2 shares, as is your ownership. Look at it this way. Lets say Fords market capitalization is $1000. Ford has 1000 shares outstanding. Each share is therefore worth $1. YOU own 50 shares of Ford stock worth $50 and own 5% of the company. Now lets say Ford wants to make their stock look "better" so they issue a 2:1 reverse stock split. As i stated earlier, this means that you will trade 2 shares of your Ford stock in exchange for 1 share of Ford stock, which sounds bad right? But it is not. Now after this reverse stock split, Fords market capitalization is still $1000. Ford now has 500 shares outstanding (1000/2). Therefore each Ford share is worth $2. YOU now own 25 shares of Ford stock still worth $50 and you still own 5% of the company. Now lets assume Ford decided that $1/share was too much and they do the opposite, a 1:2 stock split. That means that for everyone one share of Ford stock you own, you will receive 2 shares in return. Now ford still has a market cap of $1000 and now has 2000 shares outstanding (1000x2), and thus each share is worth $0.50... YOU now own 100 shares of Ford company worth $50 (100x.50) and you still own 5% of the company (100/2000). The difference between that and what GM is doing, is that GM is going to issue a TON of new shares to the point that old shareholders COMBINED would control all of 1% of the company. THAT is what is wiping out their stock ownership, not the reverse stock split afterward... although at 100:1, it may get rid of the people that only had a few shares... i am not sure how they would deal with someone who only owned say 50 shares of it. So in conclusion, you can see that stock splits and reverse stock splits are nothing to be afraid of. I am sorry i made them sound bad earlier, i am not really sure what i was thinking, but i was more concerned with the massive dilution that existing shareholders are going to experience through this.

That would be what makes your statement a pun, yes.