this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2024
579 points (83.5% liked)
AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND
758 readers
1122 users here now
This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
♦ ♦ ♦
RULES
① Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.
② Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
③ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.
④ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.
⑤ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.
Please also abide by the instance rules.
♦ ♦ ♦
Can't get enough? Visit my blog.
♦ ♦ ♦
Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.
$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You're either 145 or full of shit ;). Also while important initiatives hardly anyone gives a shit about them. They're things you do when base needs are met and base needs are not being met.
While it IS true that you and I are both full of shit, and it is also true that I'm not 145 it is no less true that the USGS does a tonne of important survey work that makes so many other endeavors possible. It's the sort of thing that governments should do. The 'name one thing' question implies that there is nothing that government does or has done that is of value. Which, to employ your terminology is even more full of shit.
That's a long way to say you didn't actually read what you were replying to, let me help by refocusing you on the point that individual was making:
You'll note that the things you listed are probably not in your life time. 1970 would put you at a minimum of 54 meaning a 32% chance. Not that I particular care about your age. Just refocusing you on the actual spirit and letter of the statement. And the fact that 1970 being your most recent example should be what concerns you even more.
You'll also note I agreed with you that they were important. just not as important as ensuring the quality of life of the average american which has declined economically far too much in the last 6 decades.
You're so adorable when you get snarky. I see you don't want something during my lifetime, but rather something recent. If you were better at understanding your own thoughts, I bet you'd be better at communicating them.
its cute to watch you try to defend your choices as being even remotely relevant. maybe if you were better at reading comprehension you wouldn't be in this mess.
Have you ever noticed that your phrasing impacts other people's response to you? Let's try this, since we've already tried snarky, and it isn't really working all that well, so let's try something else. Here, I'll try first: I appreciate that you want to engage in meaningful conversation. And I'll throw in another, just for fun: You are right that I named federal government agencies, not actions taken by the US government. Tho' I do have to point out that these agencies do things, and have done things, yes even during my lifetime, and perhaps even yours. Even recently.