In this issue

Intereting Info

On Electromagnetic fields

I recently had a client who was concerned because the electrical panel was located in the basement directly below the kitchen. She wanted to know if her family would be exposed to electromagnetic radiation from the panel. As the home was otherwise very nice (they still walked, although I’ll never figure out why), I decided I would simply punt on the issue and not scare due to something I knew nothing about.

But this got my interest, so I did a bit of research on this topic. As I recently had to write something up on this, this the draft of what I wrote.

As a brief explanation electromagnetic fields (EMF) encompass the entire spectrum of the fields of energy that surround us. Essentially as our bodies are part and are affected by the whole electromagnetic spectrum.  EMF encompasses the very low frequency waves, such as from power sources, radio, cell signal, TV signals, up through microwaves, infrared, and the visible light spectrum (the colors we can see). These are referred to as non-ionizing waves as they do not heat up or cause damage to human tissues. The higher frequency waves proceed from ultraviolet light, next X rays, up to gamma rays. Ionizing waves are directly harmful to human tissues.

For our purposes, we need to note that there are three types of electromagnetic fields that we should be concerned about:

First, to quote Michael Neuret, “magnetic fields are the EMF component most often linked to serious health effects in the scientific research literature (e.g., the link between power lines and leukemia). These common magnetic fields are emitted from power lines, building wiring, electrical panels, lights, appliances, and virtually every device that runs on regular electricity.

Electric fields make up the other half of the common electro-magnetic fields emitted from power lines, wiring, lights and appliances. They are also linked to many important biological effects, but have been studied less.  Anecdotally, electric fields are often involved when people knowingly feel “symptoms” and discomfort from different electrical sources.   Electric fields induce significant voltages onto the skin, which are easily sensed and measured.

Finally, Radio frequency or “RF” includes the higher frequency fields and microwaves emitted by cell towers and cell phones, TV and radio broadcast towers, cordless phones, Wi-Fi and other wireless computer components, microwave ovens, baby monitors, Smart Meters and various other electronic devices.  “

We’ll go over these by looking at the largest sources of exposure and the risks and claims regarding these. Without getting to much into the possible risks from electromagnetic fields, I’ll try to provide some common sense advice on how you can limit your exposure – and risks – when in the home buying process – and after you in the home.

As noted, electromagnetic fields (EMF) comes in two types: ionizing and non-ionizing. “Ionizing” basically refers to the ability of the energy to break chemical bonds into ions. Electromagnetic radiation of the ionizing radiation type (X-rays and gamma rays) is a problem as it causes DNA damage. But, what about radiation from the non-ionizing electromagnetic fields ?

This is where things get controversial. Because the low frequency waves produced by cell towers are the non- ionizing low frequency types, the telecom industry has argued that cell signals are not a problem. Numerous studies they present seem to support this. The same is argued for the effect of high power transmission lines: that the level of exposure to the radiation from EMF’S from power lines has little or no health effects.  They may be correct – I’m not qualified to give a definitive answer, but from doing a bit of research on this, homes with elevated electromagnetic fields from power sources usually have a wiring problem – and not a problem with the power lines.

What are the reputed health concerns with exposure to electronic magnetic fields (EMF)…

There are numerous studies on the low frequency electromagnetic fields produced by power lines and the higher frequency fields produced by cell phones, cell towers, other RF sources (such as smart meters) that do not show these to be significant health risk.  The problem is: most of the studies funded by the telecom industry do not show a link between EMF exposure and health issues, while numerous independent studies come to very different conclusions. Scientists initially assumed that, because EMF’s from these sources are not an ionizing type of radiation such as X rays or gamma rays (that do ionize, or damage, the molecules they hit) that they would not be a risk to human health.   Unfortunately, scientists then discovered that EMF’s can cause harmful biological effects not only by heating up sensitive tissues but that low-level EMFs can also influence or interfere with sensitive "bio-electromagnetic" processes within our cells, brains and bodies.  The human body is in fact an amazing living "bio-electronic" machine, utilizing many sensitive electromagnetic processes for the proper functioning of our brain, nervous system, immune system and other organs.   To quote Michael Neuert:

“…researchers have shown that our pineal gland can sense daily changes in the earth's natural magnetic field, and use this information to help regulate our brain wave patterns and wake/sleep cycle.  An example of electromagnetic interference (EMI) affecting human biology is found in the fact that artificial magnetic fields (like those from power lines) can suppress the secretion of melatonin from the pineal gland at night.  This is important because melatonin is the main hormone which initiates our sleep cycle.  It is also a strong antioxidant which fights cancer naturally within our bodies”.

Another problem is that, as cell phone usage has only really taken off over the last ten or fifteen years, there have been no long term studies on the risks.

What are the health concerns?

While this is a matter of much controversy, studies suggest that EMFs may be linked to a variety of health problems including leukemia, lymphoma, brain and nervous system cancers, melanoma, breast cancer, miscarriage, birth defects, Alzheimer’s disease, Lou Gehrig’s disease, depression and suicide. Anecdotally, EMFs have been associated with symptoms such as nausea, headache, fatigue, anxiety, dizziness, mental confusion, memory loss, sleep disturbance, seizures, tinnitus, changes to blood pressure and heart rate, itchy or burning skin sensations, and skin rashes. Anecdotally, there are increasing numbers of people who report "hypersensitivity" to electromagnetic fields, similar to the way that some individuals have become "hypersensitive" to chemicals, often as the result of over-exposure in the past.

Exposure to high magnetic and electrical fields from high transmission lines AND other power sources…

Transmission lines…. There have been numerous claims that the low frequency EMF’s from high voltage lines could increase the risk of cancer, particularly childhood leukemia. Importantly, other studies have not shown this correlation. I cannot weigh in on this, as the science or proof of health affects may not be entirely settled. In terms of what to think about when looking at homes near high power transmission lines, I think the critical factor is just how close you are to the transmission lines. Electromagnetic fields decrease with distance from the source. At anywhere from 300 to 1000 feet the level of EMF’s produced by power lines reaches ‘background levels’ – in other words, there is simply is no elevated exposure. You may be able to see the transmission lines from your home or backyard, but if you are a sufficient distance (see below) away this may not be a problem. In many states, California and in many areas in New England, the utility companies will even come out to the property where homeowners have concerns about power lines, and will do an EMF survey with special ‘Gause meters’ to indicate the fields that may be reaching the house.   In terms of household appliances, most will produce EMF’s but if correctly wired you should not have any elevated exposures at one to three feet away.

The issue with exposure to high magnetic fields, however, goes beyond proximity to high voltage transmission lines. Regarding this, I’ll quote Michael R. Neuert, of EMF ( )

“It is difficult to predict a safe distance from power lines, because the EMFs can vary greatly depending upon the situation.  The best advice is to measure with a gaussmeter to determine the actual levels of magnetic fields and the distance required in your particular case.  (Special note: magnetic fields are particular EMF component most often linked to health effects in the studies.  They are measured with special instruments called gaussmeters.)

The strongest magnetic fields are usually emitted from high voltage transmission lines — the power lines on the big, tall metal towers.  To be sure that you are reducing the exposure levels to 0.5 milligauss (mG) or less, a safety distance of 700 feet may be needed.  It could be much less, but sometimes more.  You must test with a gaussmeter to be sure.

It's even more difficult to predict a safe distance from neighborhood power distribution lines — the type typically found on wooden poles.  For example, homes with a nearby transformer will sometimes have higher EMFs because the transformer is a hub and the power lines carry more electricity for a group of homes.  The issue is complicated by the fact that there can be stray electricity flowing in the metal water service pipes of the neighborhood, increasing the magnetic fields from both the power lines and from the buried pipes!

Thus, there is no reliable safety distance for neighborhood power lines.  In general, a magnetic field level of 0.5 mG will be reached somewhere between 10 and 200 feet from the wires.  But you cannot tell by simply looking up at the power lines.  You have to test on-site with a gaussmeter to be sure.

If the electrical power lines are installed underground, the magnetic fields may be just as strong, or even stronger.  This is because the power lines could actually be closer to you when only buried a few feet down, rather than up 20 or 30 feet overhead.  For neighborhoods with buried power lines, you must always test with a gaussmeter.

Power lines also emit electric fields.  The electric fields from high voltage transmission lines (metal towers) can be very strong outside near the wires, and extend for over a thousand feet.  However once inside the home, the building structure usually provides some shielding, and the electric fields from electrical wiring and cords will usually be much stronger than that from the power lines.”

On this I’ll note that I’ve the voltage stick I keep in my shirt pocket go off when inspecting homes near power lines – but usually just when I am on the outside of the home. Its disconcerting, but the electrical EMF fields are not believed to be a significant concern – and they are easily shielded by the trees and the home’s walls and ceilings. The magnetic portion of the electromagnetic fields penetrate through the walls are not easy to shield.

Exposure to EMF’s from power sources within the home….

One of the authorities on problems with EMF’s, Karl Riley, found that, when conducting studies to identify the sources of high EMF levels in homes and schools, that most of the time the problem was not from the transmission lines or the power lines outside the home. Instead, bad wiring practices (specially an improper grounding the ‘neutral’ wires) that were the source of the problem. Some of these practices can be spotted by the home inspector – but others are concealed from view. I’ll note at the end of this section having a further evaluation by a specialist in this area.

Exposure to RF waves from cell towers, other sources…

Exposure to electromagnetic fields from ell towers, are another area of concern. Cell phones communicate with nearby cell towers mainly through radiofrequency (RF) waves, a form of energy in the electromagnetic spectrum between FM radio waves and microwaves. Like FM radio waves, microwaves, visible light, and heat, they are forms of non-ionizing radiation that do not directly damage the DNA inside cells. The stronger (ionizing) types of radiation such as x-rays, gamma rays, and ultraviolet (UV) light are thought to be able to cause cancer.

To put myself out on a limb, in my opinion cell towers that are some distance may not pose a high risk of exposure to harmful EMF’s.

The problem is, you may find cell tower installations in buildings where you did not even know they were present. There are over 300,000 cell tower installations in the United States. Many now are disguised as chimneys, trees, or just boxes on commercial buildings.   (I once inspected an old church and was ascending up interior ladders in the tall steeple when I found I was surrounded by the large cables from the cell tower installation inside the steeple. I can only wonder what my exposure was for that day! In any case, I didn’t know the cell tower was even there before ascending the steeple. What about the neighbors to this church?), Where a base station is installed on top of a building where people live or work, how many people who work or live next to this are aware that there is a cell site close by and – the high levels of radiation that they are subjected to every day.

To quote Michael Neuert again:

It is also difficult to predict a safe distance from cell towers.  For example, cell towers are designed to transmit most of their radio frequency (RF) energy horizontally.  Some areas below the tower may have lower levels than locations farther away that are more in line with the vertical height of the antennas. 

The exposure from a cell tower will depend on the type of antennas, the number of antennas, how much the antennas are actually being used, the time of day, etc.  The distance needed to reduce exposures down to the General Public Precautionary Level of 0.010 microwatt per centimeter squared (μW/cm²) is often around a quarter of a mile (1320 feet) or more.  Due to the uncertainty, on-site testing with a broadband RF test meter is strongly recommended.

A German study reported that people living within 400 meters (1312 feet) of cell towers had over 3 times the normal rate for new cancers (City of Naila 2004).  In an Israeli study, the relative risk for cancer was about 4 times greater within 350 meters (1148 feet) of the cell tower (Wolf et al. 1997).  Based on findings like these, a minimum safety distance of 1/4 mile (1320 feet) might be considered prudent. 

RF exposure from other devices…

Low frequency (which doesn’t necessarily mean without biological effects) RF signals will also be generated by numerous sources, including radio and TV stations. Again, its proximity that is a concern: you may get more exposure when sitting right in front of a TV than you would be exposed to than the signals reaching the home. Micheal Neuret also expresses concern about living next to police and fire stations as these use a higher frequency cell signal that may be more difficult to shield within the home.

Electromagnetic and RF radiation inside the home....

The levels and quality of the electromagnetic fields in the home is also a concern to be aware of. Cell towers get all of the attention regarding possible effects from RF exposure. These may not be the thing you should be the most concerned about, again assuming you are not in close proximity to a cell tower.     I was once told a knowledgeable source that one gets more radiation from cell phones when a weak signal is present – so one could argue that having more towers and stronger signals may be a plus   Your exposure to low frequency RF waves is much higher when you are using a cell phone than what you will get from a cell tower located some distance from your home.

Importantly, a wireless router in your home will also vastly increase your exposure to RF electromagnetic frequencies. A wireless router basically is a low powered home-based cell tower.   RF fields are also emitted from other wireless and electronic devices including: cell phones, cordless phones (even higher levels than cell phones), TV/radio broadcast towers, Wi-Fi, wireless computers and components, baby monitors, microwave ovens, radar, etc.   There have recently been concerns raised about the electromagnetic fields generated by smart meters.   I’ve talked to people in this field who dismiss the concerns with these meters, but cautions are still in order if your living space is directly adjacent to these (see list of ways to decrease your risks at the end of this section)

As a general comment, I believe the overall levels of exposure to RF’s and EMF’s in our country should be a concern. This is one of those topics where there is limited but damning evidence that EMF’s are a significant concern versus the research from the government and ‘official’ sources saying, basically, ‘we don’t know’.   I won’t wade into this here; I’ve provided links to websites on electromagnetic fields. I will say that the issue of exposure to EMF’s from cell phones and from electrical fields within the home is not something typically subject to evaluation during the home buying process. I don’t know any inspectors who would offer this and- to be honest, one would need to test for EMF’s after you have moved in as the electronic equipment you may bring with you, in particular your wireless router, could be a source EMF’s.   Also, in many homes, the electric and magnetic fields will also carry added RF frequencies due to the use of dimmers, fluorescent lights, computers, Wi-Fi, Smart Meters, etc.  (This is referred to as “Dirty Electricity”).

ASHI, State, Licensing Information

It was reported at the December meeting that the STATE (Massachusetts) is looking at the status of 'independent contractors' in multi-inspector companies - and is challenging one large company on this issue.  I've provided correspondence with Jim Mushinsky on some of the issues that came up.  This is just correspondence:  not advice nor any definitive treatment of the issues.  This will be an ongoing topic, given the state's interest in defining various types of subcontractors are in in effect employees, meaning, they will be subject to the requirements for workman's compensation, withholding, possible health insurance, etc.  

First, the letter from Melissa Butts to Jim on this issue:

RE: Employee or Contractor - Associate Home Inspector


Hi Jim,

If your students have issues with non-payment of wages or are having to pay a fee to work, I wouldrecommend they contact the Attorney General's Office - Fair Labor Division to file a wage complaint.

Other issues in which they can file a wage complaint include non-payment for work, overtime, the stateminimum wage, earned vacation wages, or tips. It is recommended to file a complaint using the Non-Payment of Wage and Workplace Complaint Form or you call at 617-727-3465. Please feel free tocontact me should you have additional questions.


Melissa Butts, Program Coordinator

Council on the Underground Economy

19 Staniford Street, 2nd Floor

Boston, MA 02114

Phone: 617-626-7103


From: Jim Mushinsky

To: Council Underground Economy

Subject: Employee or Contractor - Associate Home Inspector


Dear CUE,

I am an education provider for Massachusetts Associate Home Inspector training. To the best of my knowledge, an Associate Home Inspector and applicant for an Associate Home Inspector License must be employees due to the requirement of supervision and the normal course of business for the supervisor is home inspection.


I am hearing from several students that have completed the training course and passed the State

approved exam, that some Home Inspectors are not providing employment. Is this OK?

I have also heard the Board of Registration of Home Inspectors is aware of the practice of avoiding employment yet still grants licenses to applicants that fail to achieve employment.

I am looking for guidance to offer to students when they come to me with this complaint. Should I direct them to your office or should I be directing them somewhere else?


Jim Mushinsky



Text of my letter to Jim (provided with Jim's permission)

Dear Jim:

I must confess I am a bit confused on this issue. (It is murky territory!). He is the way I would interpret the whole issue or, at least, how I have looked on this to this point. Please clarify as this is just my initial thoughts on this.

First, for the first 25 inspections that an apprentice is doing under the supervisor’s full supervision, the critical issue is are they getting paid for this. In most cases not. Are they paying the supervisor? Most likely, but this arrangement does not imply that either party is an employer. The agreement for payment to the supervisor would be handled contractually, verbally or in writing, between the parties.   This assumes that the business is derived from a referral to the supervisor’s company.   The supervisor could ‘handle’ this inspection on his/her own and receive payment as they will simply oversee the inspection and must write the report. No payment or offer of employment is being made to the associate inspector.

During the next 100 inspections…

During the next 100 inspections the associate inspector must do, this could be interpreted differently, depending on one of three scenarios, provided below.

  1. The associate does the inspection under their own company name; the supervisor reviews and signs off on the report. In this case the associate keeps the fee for the inspection and pays the agreed upon rate for the supervisor to review this and sign off. There is still no offer of employment and the associated requirements for withholding, workman’s comp, etc. by the supervisor’s company does not apply. Any referral to the associate’s inspectors company would not constitute an offer of employment, and a referral fee would be a tax write off for the associate and a taxable gain for the ‘supervisor’s company.


  1. The associate inspector does the inspection for the supervisor’s company, with the supervisor directly overseeing the inspection. Two questions: Do they have to get paid and would they have to be considered an employee? It would seem (vague legally?) that it depends on the degree of supervision, and specifically whether the trainee is providing services that the supervisor could not – or chooses not – to do on their own. If the supervisor is standing in the background and oversees the inspection and then spends time reviewing the report, he is still basically providing the service to the home buying client. Would there be an obligation to pay the trainee/apprentice in that scenario? I would say no.

But if the supervisor pays the trainee to help with the inspection (such as may be done to give the trainee income prior to an expectation for employment with that company) then it would seem that the associate inspector is “an employee” of the supervisor’s company.

The legal conundrum entailed in the state’s attorney regarding their concern that associate inspectors have to “pay a fee to work” is that the supervisors/supervising company and the associate inspector may have an agreement, verbal or written, that the associate will pay ‘X’ amount for each inspection (for the training and oversight, as well as the legal exposure of signing off on the associate’s reports) for the first !25 inspections. The associate inspector may only get to do inspections on their own – or are allowed to provide a substantial contribution to the inspection offered to the client by the supervisor/supervising company, if they agree to pay the supervisor. Does this mean they are having to “pay to work”?   Hmmm…..

If I were an attorney I would argue that “paying a fee to work” does not describe the relationship between the supervisor and the apprentice. , for those providing work to associate inspectors they are supervising. I’m not an attorney, however, so….

To summarize my thinking, the supervisor and his/her company has no obligation to provide employment to the apprentice/trainee and assisting with the inspection would not be an offer of employment. On the other hand, if the supervisor’s company benefits economically from the services of the apprentice then they could - and should be, by the states’ interpretation - considered an employee of the supervisor.

My legal interpretation may be just what I think should be the case – and not what the state’s attorneys would argue. Let me know your thoughts on this.

Best regards,

Ernie Simpson

Response from Jim Mushinsky for NL

Hi Ernie,

Sorry about the delay... my days and nights are still very busy.

Yes.  Please feel free to distribute any of our correspondence.  Since I do not have an authoritative response on any of these issues, I hope to share my opinion with others and also learn their opinions on the subject.

Very interesting interpretations, of course I wish I had the real answers to when is employment required within the MA Home Inspection Industry.

When I review MGL with respect to Home Inspectors, it appears to me that employment is always required for the Associate Home Inspector and Associate Home Inspector Applicant.   In my opinion, 266 CMR creates ambiguity with the introduction of the term "trainee".  This appears to me as a Board attempt to regulate or adjudicate ordinary people when the statute clearly limits their authority to Home Inspector and Associate Home Inspector license holders.

In my opinion, I believe the lawmakers thought they were getting all new employers from the initial seeding of home inspector licenses.  It appears that few of these seeds have germinated.

Take care,


ASHI New England News

About: Facebook is a social media website were businesses and individuals can make profiles and pages to post pictures videos and other information   .

ASHI New England created its own page to interact and stay in touch with its members and customer base.


How to find the ASHI page: Check the website or search @ASHINewEngland on Facebook.


Once on the Facebook website we ask that you follow and like the Facebook as seen here.  



How does this benefit you? We are encouraging contributions from our local ASHI members and anything posted on the Facebook page will be credit back to the contributor. So the more followers you get and the more you contribute to the page, the more exposure your business gets!


We look forward to all of your contributions and appreciate your support.


How to contribute: Email [email protected] or [email protected]


Don’t have a Facebook page? Email the above Facebook link and we will walk you through setting one up!



ASHI New England Newsletter Jan 2018  

Notes from the editor

It has now been eight months since the last newsletter (the April Fool’s issue) that almost got me fired (did you know it was only deemed publishable for the membership – not the affiliates. There were a number of non-renewals for our chapter shortly thereafter during renewal season but I’ve tried to argue with the Board that they weren’t doing this based on that newsletter. Anyhow, onward…


On the state of the real estate market…

As we all know, this real estate market in the last year has turned into a raving Sellers market.    Who would’ve thought? This has had some impact on our business – especially those near the Boston area, where people have been desperate to get their offer accepted. Most of the buyer’s agents I know have been telling people to get the inspection done, even if they agree to a ‘no negotiation’ clause but they tell me some buyers just don’t want anything to interfere with their dream of buying a home that will probably sell for half or less when the next crash hits. I’ve heard of buyers over-bidding (on a probably already overpriced home) by $50,000 just to get their “foot in the door” (as the real estate pundits like to advise). Not to take this too far, but its probably “foot in the door” and  …


I mean really, I feel bad for the buyers out there. What can really hurt today’s desperate buyers – other than the fact that they may be overpaying is that, when they agree to buy with no inspection – or other – contingency clauses, they are ‘locked in’: they can’t withdraw and get their money back if the inspection or other investigations reveal problems with the home after they have made their offer/financial death sentence. Anecdotally – and I can’t remember the details – I heard of one deal where the buyer walked after making  a no negotiation/no inspection offer and the seller kept the down payment.  Note: if you know of good stories please pass them on to me.


ASIDE: But I’m talking to the choir here, aren’t I? We all know that we God’s gift to the home buying public, right?


Another thing I don’t like about the Seller’s market is that it makes the sellers into jerks. I mean, you find something that would never ‘fly’ in a normal market, something that the seller would almost always correct – and they just stick the buyer with the cost. I’ve found termite infestations, leaking pipes, windows that crash down when you release the locks, systems where we are unsure if they are working - and you can probably add to the list - where the seller just said, more or less, ‘take it or leave it’. In most cases, the buyers simply have to take it. When I have gotten my buyers to walk on what I thought were almost ‘tear downs’, I find out that the seller then sold the home to someone else for $20,000 more. Who are these people???


So where will this end? Usually this type of market doesn’t end well, but I can’t see where we are in a repeat of 2007, where the whole run up was based on a giant fraud. Yes, if the economy continues to grow and metro Boston economy stays healthy, this could go on for while… or won’t.

Back to top

My Take

Has anyone every questioned the economics of heating with wood. Beyond the fact that you – or your wood supplier – have to massacre living creatures (yeah, read Peter Wohlleben’s bestseller, "The Hidden Life of Trees") so you can chop them up and throw them in a fire (are you feeling guilty yet), I have to inform you of the economics of the woodstove I had put in when we renovated the kitchen in our home a few years back (I say “we”: the only thing I was allowed to do was the demo work).

Anyhow, my wife got her island and banquet.  Brilliant me:  I got the woodstove. Here how that worked out economically:

Cost of stove $1500

Cost of installation : probably about $3000

Cost to redo heat shield three years later: $800

Cost of chimney sweep: $95

Cost of wood: I cut my own wood (or at least did). Probably about 80 hours a year cutting, hauling it off of the hillside in back, splitting (using neighbors splitter, otherwise add this cost). Anyhow, value of one wood cord each year if brought from dealer: $350 vs. probably $4000 a year if l value my time at $50,00/hour.

Cost of fixing chain saw this year: $149

Cost of chiropractor this fall, after health insurance: $90 (may be from lifting wood, maybe not)

Cost of chainsaw: $400 (brought in past but I will wear this out so must depreciate)

Cost of shed and rack now used to house wood: probably $3000.

Cost of negative feedback from wife: incalculable.

Besides this, does any one know how much time is involved with cleaning the thing out every day I use it, restocking the stove with wood I have to haul down from the shed behind my home.

Okay, on the plus side:

-        I save $350 a year in oil costs (100 gallons of oil saved).

-        I have back up heat should I lose power (I haven’t in ten years – ever since I brought a generator).

-        I can live under the illusion that I have a small iota of self sufficiency (did I tell you I was heavily influenced by the 1960’s back to the land movement?)

-        I can drive my car for about 3000 miles (or thereabouts) but am carbon neutral due to my use of wood offsetting my heating oil usage…

On balance, once you exclude the economics, it seems a wash….

Back to top

On the lighter side


All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.

The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met.

OK, so what's the speed of dark?

How do you tell when you're out of invisible ink?

If everything seems to be going well, you have obviously overlooked

Support bacteria - they're the only culture some people have.

When everything is coming your way, you're in the wrong lane.

Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.

Hard work pays off in the future. Laziness pays off now.

Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film.

Shin: a device for finding furniture in the dark.

Many people quit looking for work when they find a job.

I intend to live forever - so far, so good.

Join the Army, meet interesting people, kill them.

Back to top

Classified Ads

Back to top