"The nouveaux riches don't know how to treat servants."

>>1700468
Pajeet?

It's STAFF, not servants, over here.

>>1700489
Nope.

And not if they're your own maid or cook. Restaurants have staff. Houses don't.

Though apparently they're supposed to "help" and not "serve" these days, I think the distinction has to do with rock music or Jack Kerouac or something. Well, so long as the mirrors get polished.

>>1700501
>Restaurants have staff. Houses don't.
Bollocks

> I think the distinction has to do with rock music or Jack Kerouac or something.
Your explanations and grammar are as muddled as your mind, kid.

>>1700489
>>1700557

cry more peasant trash

>>1700561
>verified as Pajeet
Go add up your lakhs, gandhu

File: 13827377_1770043403279450_53982028_n.jpg (116KB, 640x547px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 640x547px

>>1700561
paki.
poo poo

>>1700468
They mean that new money people are asshole shitheads.

Also yeah, "staff" not servants. Not the 1800s anymore.

>>1700468
i think they mean nouveaux riches are too friendly with their servants and try to be their buddy. they arent used to having servants and they arent really comfortable with it.

>>1700639
This. They still have some human in them during and throughout the transition.

>>1700618
I dhonth know whath you're thalkhingh abhouth.

>>1700738
Obviously.
>"Nouveaux riches"
lol
Is "riches" a French word? No it isn't.
Do grand houses have servants? Not outside of India they don't. They have staff.
"The nouveaux riches don't know how to treat servants."
That quote was expressed by no-one.

File: 1482173782322.jpg (134KB, 930x1395px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 930x1395px

>>1701469
"riche(s)" is actually a very common french word.

>>1701469
>>Is "riches" a French word? No it isn't.
If you're going to play schoolmarm, at least know your subject.

So, a small house with a maid who doubles as a cook has "a staff"?

"They don't know how to treat the staff. They keep making her do trivial things and then act chummy with her. Yes sirree, they treat that staff inappropriately."

I don't know why you keep making references to Khurrylandh, but you're kind of making me want to visit it.

>That quote was expressed by no-one.
I'm quoting Jilly Cooper, who "expressed" it, as you say.

>>1700468
Only preppy faggots wear loafers.

>>1701469
Hey man its like calling a nigger an African american he still a nugget muncher its just cp

>>1701469
>Is "riches" a French word? No it isn't.
Yes it is.
Your ignorance makes me hard.

>>1700468
>>1700639

Masters are to give to their servants that which is just and equal and they should not be treated with rigor or contempt but given a sufficient and decent provision, both in sickness and health.

The only way to govern them is to make them so content with their places that they shall fear turning away.

>>1700468

>treat servants
Servants?

You mean people that you pay to do a job?

We call those employees, now.

>>1701874
Employee implies that they're being managed, and also work for members of the public. It's not a domestic situation at all. Employer is practically synonymous with businessman.

The real issue here is that the word servant is somehow offensive to the hip-hoppin', to-the-man-stickin', mirror-polishin' rebel help of today. It just seems euphemistic to call them anything else.