Words/phrases I wish would go away

[slackmax]

When I first heard this about 2 months ago, I liked it. But now it's everywhere and I am real tired of it. 

He or she  'said the quiet part out loud'. Means stating a controversial opinion that you meant (?) not to say' along with some other inoffensive stuff.     

It was cute at first, but is now just annoying. 

[Dicey]

One of my advisers, who was among the most successful, accomplished and kind people I have ever met, told me that “truly busy people rarely bother telling you how busy they are. The ones that do just want to be perceived as busy”.

This is insane in how truthful it is. Now, off to tell my coworkers about how busy I am!

Coworkers?

[Miss Piggy]

When I first heard this about 2 months ago, I liked it. But now it's everywhere and I am real tired of it. 

He or she  'said the quiet part out loud'. Means stating a controversial opinion that you meant (?) not to say' along with some other inoffensive stuff.     

It was cute at first, but is now just annoying.

How about "let's bring the background to the foreground"? Same meaning, just as annoying.

This reminds me of another recent annoying phrase: "Can I just call an audible here?"  (I knew at one point the source of this one, which still didn't make it okay.)

[Chaplin]

"Imma" as in "Imma just going to do that now." My kid started using it a few weeks ago and when it looked like it was going to become a habit we had words. "We had words" might be another phrase to leave behind too...

[Paul der Krake]

Youzza do what now?

[Taran Wanderer]

Youzza gotta know that @Imma appreciates that.

[sui generis]

Myself.

Not a bad word generally.  But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself".  Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc.  Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.

Why??

[Kris]

Myself.

Not a bad word generally.  But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself".  Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc.  Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.

Why??

Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."

[GreenSheep]

Myself.

Not a bad word generally.  But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself".  Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc.  Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.

Why??

Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."

I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."

"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!

[Chaplin]

Myself.

Not a bad word generally.  But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself".  Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc.  Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.

Why??

Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."

I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."

"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!

Yes! Misuses of "myself" bug me, and utilize is completely useless (ulitizeless, utilityless?).

I saw "utilize" defined as "use something for which it's not intended," so I might utilize a wrench as a hammer, but I use a hammer to pound a nail. I have only seen this definition once, but I like it. It means that pretty much everyone utilizes the word utilize.

[Morning Glory]

Myself.

Not a bad word generally.  But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself".  Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc.  Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.

Why??

Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."

I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."

"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!

Yes! Misuses of "myself" bug me, and utilize is completely useless (ulitizeless, utilityless?).

I saw "utilize" defined as "use something for which it's not intended," so I might utilize a wrench as a hammer, but I use a hammer to pound a nail. I have only seen this definition once, but I like it. It means that pretty much everyone utilizes the word utilize.

They utilize leverage as a verb when it ought to be used as a noun.

I've seen "upper extremity" instead of arm before. Used to drive me nuts. It also can be abbreviated "UE". The plural is "UE's" because evidently that is easier than typing "arms". Smh.

[Mr. Green]

"I don't know who needs to hear this but..."

Just spit it out, man!

[calimom]

Myself.

Not a bad word generally.  But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself".  Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc.  Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.

Why??

Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."

I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."

"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!

Misuse of the word "whom" belongs on this list.

"At the present time, Jo Anne was unable to utilize her upper extremity. Her sister, an individual whom is named Beth Anne, drove her vehicle over to be of assistance."

[Kris]

Myself.

Not a bad word generally.  But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself".  Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc.  Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.

Why??

Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."

I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."

"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!

Misuse of the word "whom" belongs on this list.

"At the present time, Jo Anne was unable to utilize her upper extremity. Her sister, an individual whom is named Beth Anne, drove her vehicle over to be of assistance."

Oh, lord yes.

[slackmax]

The phrase "to learn more", in radio commercials.

"Thanks for listening to our commercial for Barfo products. To learn more, go to Barfo.com."

It was perfectly OK at first, but now every ******* radio commercial ends with "to learn more, go to ripmeoff.com".   Just sick of it. 

It's like the evening news. All  the same.       

[Paul der Krake]

I've started to notice the overuse of "harmful" and "harm" for everything.

Someone is doing (or not doing!) something I don't like, quick, speak up about the harm being done. It now reads like boilerplate language, stripped of any punch.

[Paul der Krake]

Myself.

Not a bad word generally.  But seems like people are forgetting that the word "I" and "me" exist when they in a group of people and now only use "myself".  Like "Myself and my boyfriend are going to . . ." or "she gave this gift to my wife, my daughter and myself" etc.  Saw it twice this morning before even getting out of bed.

Why??

Yeah, I really really hate that as well. My theory is that it tends to be used when people want to sound more erudite, thinking more syllables = smarter. Kind of like people who always use "vehicle" instead of just saying "car."

I think you're right. There should be a list of these for serious writers/speakers to avoid. Sometimes a longer word does add some nuance, but so often they're just used to "sound smart."

"utilize" for "use"
"individual" for "person"
"at this time" -- or worse -- "at the present moment" for "now"
I know there are tons of others, but of course none of them are coming to mind now!

Misuse of the word "whom" belongs on this list.

"At the present time, Jo Anne was unable to utilize her upper extremity. Her sister, an individual whom is named Beth Anne, drove her vehicle over to be of assistance."

Oh, lord yes.

Nothing says "I'm totally out of my element and overcompensating" like people trying to use what they think is elaborate language. Succession (the TV series) did that brilliantly with Cousin Greg. Whenever he's in an uncomfortable situation he falls back to that. It reaches its most absurd when testifying in from of Congress ("Yes, If It Is To Be Said, So It Be, So It Is."), but it's sprinkled throughout the series.

[GreenSheep]

I've started to notice the overuse of "harmful" and "harm" for everything.

Someone is doing (or not doing!) something I don't like, quick, speak up about the harm being done. It now reads like boilerplate language, stripped of any punch.

Same with "emergency" and "crisis." I can hardly use those words sarcastically anymore ("There was a crisis at the grocery store -- they were out of bananas! And now I'm having a breakfast emergency because what am I going to put on my oatmeal?!") because everyone uses them seriously for everything!

[GreenSheep]

Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.

[NaN]

Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.

Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.

We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.

[Dicey]

Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.

Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.

We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.

We'd still be kidding ourselves if we called them investments. In the last sentence, I would change "investments" to "expenditures".

[nereo]

Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".

[Tigerpine]

Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".

It is beyond doubt a marketing strategy, and I also find it less than amusing.

Similarly, I hate it when a company tells you "Congratulations!" after you make a purchase.  I'm sure they do that to make you feel better about your choice, but I think that secretly the only real congratulations go to the salesperson who made the sale.

[NaN]

Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.

Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.

We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.

We'd still be kidding ourselves if we called them investments. In the last sentence, I would change "investments" to "expenditures".

Nah, the definition opportunity costs can apply to both monetary investments and time/effort. If we split hairs on " investments" then we have to start that on all economic related vocabulary.

[NaN]

Hah, in my response I deleted a part before reading these. Basically I was going to say this is how American Consumerism works. We subsidize things other businesses need for profit.

[nereo]

Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".

It is beyond doubt a marketing strategy, and I also find it less than amusing.

Similarly, I hate it when a company tells you "Congratulations!" after you make a purchase.  I'm sure they do that to make you feel better about your choice, but I think that secretly the only real congratulations go to the salesperson who made the sale.

I was surprised and a little taken aback at the number of people who said "congratulations!" to us each time we've purchased a home. 
I don't know why taking out a mortgage for a home is reason to congratulate someone. But it seems to be the de-facto response whenever someone learns we bought (and are not renting) our home.

[NaN]

Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".

It is beyond doubt a marketing strategy, and I also find it less than amusing.

Similarly, I hate it when a company tells you "Congratulations!" after you make a purchase.  I'm sure they do that to make you feel better about your choice, but I think that secretly the only real congratulations go to the salesperson who made the sale.

I was surprised and a little taken aback at the number of people who said "congratulations!" to us each time we've purchased a home. 
I don't know why taking out a mortgage for a home is reason to congratulate someone. But it seems to be the de-facto response whenever someone learns we bought (and are not renting) our home.

Yes, that's a phrase I wish would go away. It would be pretty funny if the cashier at the grocery store started saying congratulations every time I checked out.

[RetiredAt63]

Over the last decade I've noticed the word "investment" applied to anything and everything that people pay for, including insurance, expensive tools, home improvements and even vacations. Typically it seems like a marketing ploy to make people feel like they are making a smart decision by trading their money for "X".

It is beyond doubt a marketing strategy, and I also find it less than amusing.

Similarly, I hate it when a company tells you "Congratulations!" after you make a purchase.  I'm sure they do that to make you feel better about your choice, but I think that secretly the only real congratulations go to the salesperson who made the sale.

I was surprised and a little taken aback at the number of people who said "congratulations!" to us each time we've purchased a home. 
I don't know why taking out a mortgage for a home is reason to congratulate someone. But it seems to be the de-facto response whenever someone learns we bought (and are not renting) our home.

When you truly own your home (not sharing co-ownership with the bank) we will all say "Congratulations" to you.  Because it may or may not be a rewarding financial investment, but it is an investment in so many other aspects of your lives. Right now any congratulation are just for saving up enough for a down payment.  Hmm, actually that is something worth congratulating you for, you have managed to show the commitment to get that savings.

Hmm, some things are investments, in that in the long run they may make or save money.  And I am firmly convinced that we need to compare apples to apples.  If I garden and someone says my tomatoes cost $.xx each, my reaction is to say $.xx is the store price for ordinary tomatoes.  What is the price for organic tomatoes, since my tomatoes are organic and I know exactly what was involved in their growing.  Or if someone buys a freezer (an upfront cost) but over the next 10 years they save a bundle by freezing things bought on sale (i.e. produce at its peak, meat on sale, etc.) then it would be an investment.  I invested in equipment for canning, because I just can't buy relish as yummy as the relish I make.  I don't even care if I am saving money (I am), I care about the quality I can get by making my own.

However, coming back on topic, most congratulations seem to be for things that won't show that kind of return.  Because they are fun or flashy or improve one's image, not because they are truly useful.

[nereo]

Recently used in a journal publication I was involved with:
"de-risking".

As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.

Bleh. 

[RWD]

Recently used in a journal publication I was involved with:
"de-risking".

As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.

Bleh.

What was wrong with the word "mitigation?" Haha

[GuitarStv]

I'm getting tired of the word "hashtag".

My son yesterday was explaining to me that he was the hashtag one smartest kid in his class.  It took me a while to figure out that he had just never heard someone refer to '#' as 'number'.

:S

[Taran Wanderer]

I'm getting tired of the word "hashtag".

My son yesterday was explaining to me that he was the hashtag one smartest kid in his class.  It took me a while to figure out that he had just never heard someone refer to '#' as 'number'.

:S

#KidsTheseDays

[zolotiyeruki]

Recently used in a journal publication I was involved with:
"de-risking".

As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.

Bleh.

What was wrong with the word "mitigation?" Haha

I believe mitigation is minimizing the effects, while making something less risky can mean either reducing the probability or mitigating the effects.

[RWD]

Recently used in a journal publication I was involved with:
"de-risking".

As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.

Bleh.

What was wrong with the word "mitigation?" Haha

I believe mitigation is minimizing the effects, while making something less risky can mean either reducing the probability or mitigating the effects.

Ah, makes sense.

[Dicey]

Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.

Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.

We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.

We'd still be kidding ourselves if we called them investments. In the last sentence, I would change "investments" to "expenditures".

Nah, the definition opportunity costs can apply to both monetary investments and time/effort. If we split hairs on " investments" then we have to start that on all economic related vocabulary.

Huh. Isn't splitting hairs what we do here?

[Taran Wanderer]

I’m tired of hopes and prayers.

[GuitarStv]

I'm getting tired of the word "hashtag".

My son yesterday was explaining to me that he was the hashtag one smartest kid in his class.  It took me a while to figure out that he had just never heard someone refer to '#' as 'number'.

:S

#KidsTheseDays

hashbrown part of the problem, not the solution

[G-dog]

I'm getting tired of the word "hashtag".

My son yesterday was explaining to me that he was the hashtag one smartest kid in his class.  It took me a while to figure out that he had just never heard someone refer to '#' as 'number'.

:S

Or pound #pound #number #tictactoe

[merula]

Recently used in a journal publication I was involved with:
"de-risking".

As in: making something less risky for an individual or company.

Bleh.

What was wrong with the word "mitigation?" Haha

I believe mitigation is minimizing the effects, while making something less risky can mean either reducing the probability or mitigating the effects.

If you can't reduce the probability or mitigate the effects, you can also lessen your risk by buying insurance to cover that specific risk. Like buying earthquake insurance when you can't retrofit your building or change the probability of earthquakes. (Sorry, I work in insurance, we're hugely pedantic as a group and this is right up my alley.)

[Taran Wanderer]

Speaking of kids… apparently cash isn’t real money.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTdWFrHxw/?k=1

[nereo]

Speaking of kids… apparently cash isn’t real money.

I kinda get that tough.  I hate accepting cash and making change, don't like carrying it around, and by itself it doesn't really leave much of a trail proving what you spent, when and to whom. I've had a $5 bill in my wallet going on three months now - it just sits there occupying space.

[NaN]

Speaking of kids… apparently cash isn’t real money.

I kinda get that tough.  I hate accepting cash and making change, don't like carrying it around, and by itself it doesn't really leave much of a trail proving what you spent, when and to whom. I've had a $5 bill in my wallet going on three months now - it just sits there occupying space.

Economies and currencies are all just made up anyway. Isn't that what the book Sapiens: A brief history of humankind taught us? The real teaching moment is telling them the balance in their account is also made up, too. Fractional banking lesson!

[NaN]

Resurrecting this thread to complain, appropriately for this forum, about the word "investment." A fancy kitchen gadget is not an "investment." An expensive article of clothing is not an "investment piece." A cool piece of furniture is not an "investment." Investments are supposed to give you a return on your money, so unless you're expecting to sell that blender, dress, or chair for a profit, you're not investing. You're just spending money on an overly expensive item. Which is fine if you have the money and you love the item and that's what you want to do... but it's not investing.

Totally disagree. But sure. One can invest in themselves in ways that don't produce a direct return on that money by the standard % you might see on your account page. It might make them happy, give someone a hobby, etc. that might make them a more productive person down the road, which in turns makes a profit but it can never be recorded with a percentage return from a stock.

We do this all the time in society. Just the act of buying a car is an investment. Also, buying a computer to use email to engage with the workforce, etc. I can see how a fancy piece of clothing might make someone fit in with others, and does not make them stand out amongst other say employees (think stock traders etc who have fancy suits.). By fitting in they may make themselves not stand out to be the one cut, or it helps them fit in so they can get that promotion. Surely all these might produce 'profit' later on in life, but it is no always clear cut. I would agree that generally these are terrible investments that have a low chance of a return, but we would kid ourselves if we said they didn't ever make a difference/return.

We'd still be kidding ourselves if we called them investments. In the last sentence, I would change "investments" to "expenditures".

Nah, the definition opportunity costs can apply to both monetary investments and time/effort. If we split hairs on " investments" then we have to start that on all economic related vocabulary.

Huh. Isn't splitting hairs what we do here?

touché

[LD_TAndK]

Has "Here's why" come up in this thread? Specifically at the end of a headline like "Stocks surge even though consumers feel lousy. Here's why". It's driving me nuts.

Also trying to find out more about the phrase, googling stuff like "Here's why etymology" or "Here's why sucks" and you just get more "here's why" articles. ARGHH

[Dicey]

Has "Here's why" come up in this thread? Specifically at the end of a headline like "Stocks surge even though consumers feel lousy. Here's why". It's driving me nuts.

Also trying to find out more about the phrase, googling stuff like "Here's why etymology" or "Here's why sucks" and you just get more "here's why" articles. ARGHH

This sounds like shorthand for someone screaming, "LISTEN TO ME,  BECAUSE I'M RIGHT!"

[Tyson]

Has "Here's why" come up in this thread? Specifically at the end of a headline like "Stocks surge even though consumers feel lousy. Here's why". It's driving me nuts.

Also trying to find out more about the phrase, googling stuff like "Here's why etymology" or "Here's why sucks" and you just get more "here's why" articles. ARGHH

I disagree with you.   Here's why.

Haha, sorry I couldn't resist :)

[RWD]

"Breaks Down X"

I'm so sick of seeing stuff like "<expert> breaks down <scenes involving their field in movies or whatever>" when the content is more accurately "casually talks about."

[slackmax]

I hear this on TV a lot. Ungendering, on purpose, and making the sentence awkward and weird.

Example:

'The assailant gave over their weapon to police'.

Are we not allowed to know the gender of the assailant?

And, of course, 'assailant' is singular, and 'their' is plural, which is incorrect.   

[sui generis]

I hear this on TV a lot. Ungendering, on purpose, and making the sentence awkward and weird.

Example:

'The assailant gave over their weapon to police'.

Are we not allowed to know the gender of the assailant?

And, of course, 'assailant' is singular, and 'their' is plural, which is incorrect.   

But their isn't (strictly) plural.  It's always been perfectly acceptable to use if you honestly don't *know* someone's gender, so why not be able to use it if you just aren't sure or believe it's one thing but haven't been able to ask them their pronouns? (<---Ah, I just did it myself!  And really, what else would I say there?  "...haven't been able to ask him or her his or her pronouns?"  Much more awkward IMO than using "they" in the singular and also falsely assumes only two genders.) I would much prefer someone using "they" and "their", etc. in the singular than making an erroneous and possibly offensive assumption about gender, in the absence of knowledge.

[merula]

I hear this on TV a lot. Ungendering, on purpose, and making the sentence awkward and weird.

Example:

'The assailant gave over their weapon to police'.

Are we not allowed to know the gender of the assailant?

And, of course, 'assailant' is singular, and 'their' is plural, which is incorrect.   

The singular they dates back hundreds of years in English. Shakespeare used it. It's the most common way of referring to an unknown person. No one actually says "Who left his or her scooter in the middle of this sidewalk?" outside of the English teachers of my childhood.