A Novel Theory On America's Economic Power

Does anyone else find American spelling to be really annoying? If there are any differences in spelling between a word in American English and proper English, the American version is almost always shorther. This shortness is generally attained by hacking the 'u' out of words with and 'ou' in them (e.g. 'colour' becomes 'color'), replacing 'ph' with a single 'f' when in the middle of a word (e.g. 'sulphate' becomes 'sulfate') and other such dubious short cuts. I believe that this slight difference in spelling may very well be the cause of Americans' comical pronunciation of the English language.

Comical relief aside, the other benefit of the American spelling system is that it is more efficient due to its brevity. While typing/writing one less letter may seem to be trivial as far as efficiency goes, adding up the number of characters saved over the course of a year could amount to millions of letters and a lot of ink. But the efficiency not only relates to ink usage, it also flows into time expenditure. It saves time spent on trivial letters which can then be used for more practical pursuits such as planning wars and seeking new oil supplies. Or better yet, it saves time for more work which means more money which means a stronger economy (and also more nuclear warheads which are very useful when starting wars and seeking oil).

So you see, friends, the American system of spelling is not simply a matter of rebelling against the British (as is commonly believed) or a case of being a vastly illiterate nation (although this is probably true anyway if Hollywood scripts are anything to go by). It's all in the name of efficiency and a better economy/nuclear arsenal.