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.
And I’d simply shrug and point to my original post to you. Then I’d suggest you put your phrasing in context to the post and the original statement made by the person you responded to.
Then I’d kindly suggest you think on how your initial snark to that person might lead to people being equally snarky to you.
Then I’d suggest you reflect and realize the fact the only one upset here about the snark is you.
Now if you wanted to have a meaningful conversation about those 3 organizations that’s fine. but this isnt the post to do so unless you have some particular claim on make that would be related to helping americans make ends meet.
Personally I didn’t care much about your original post or discussing those 3 agencies in particular. I just thought it was an amusing choice of 3 completely irrelevant agencies to the context of the entire thread and decided to save some people the effort of looking up how extremely unrelated they were to the topic at hand.
Like you could have done the health department, EPA, FCC, or any number of other agencies that routinely impact american’s day to day economic lives to make your point.
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.
And I’d simply shrug and point to my original post to you. Then I’d suggest you put your phrasing in context to the post and the original statement made by the person you responded to.
Then I’d kindly suggest you think on how your initial snark to that person might lead to people being equally snarky to you.
Then I’d suggest you reflect and realize the fact the only one upset here about the snark is you.
Now if you wanted to have a meaningful conversation about those 3 organizations that’s fine. but this isnt the post to do so unless you have some particular claim on make that would be related to helping americans make ends meet.
Personally I didn’t care much about your original post or discussing those 3 agencies in particular. I just thought it was an amusing choice of 3 completely irrelevant agencies to the context of the entire thread and decided to save some people the effort of looking up how extremely unrelated they were to the topic at hand.
Like you could have done the health department, EPA, FCC, or any number of other agencies that routinely impact american’s day to day economic lives to make your point.