toast @ toast @retrolemmy.com

Posts

1

Comments

204

Joined

2 yr. ago

Stocks, bonds, annuities

Thanks, I'll have to look at that

Multiple - that was it. Thanks!

I loved being able to group news/posts according to subject. Feel like news related to only one group today - no problem!

When I used RIF, I could group subreddits together (can't remember what the name for it was), so I could put all subreddits for one subject in one group, all subs for another subject in another. It was great when I felt like seeing news about one subject, but felt like ignoring everything else.

I don't think lemmy has anything like this, and I don't know if any of the apps do this either.

I reeaaaaly miss being able to group subs.

Bravo!

the margin of his election was thin enough that not trampling over the progressive side of the party would have kept him out of office

There, see. There's the fault in your argument. The Democratic party can't seem to stop trampling over progressives

The expert quoted has had quite a life:

After earning a BA in English literature from UCLA, Austad left academia for a number of years during which among other things, he drove a taxi cab in New York City, worked as a newspaper reporter, and trained lions for television and movies.

He sounds pretty cool.

I admit I looked him up only because his view challenged what I've been seeing in reporting on studies done in this area. I've seen what seems like a trend in studying and comparing changes in lifespan and healthspan in male and female subjects (in both human and mouse). I suspect I am suffering from some recency bias, but it really does seem to me like studies in this area are better at teasing out sex differences than in non-longevity lines of research.

Anyway, thought I'd mention the expert's colorful past

Eye sea. Ewe our sew wright. Make language mistake non possible. Easy awl understand every won know matter what. Y try harder

It is an often used and well known colloquialism

It is a bastardization of a well known colloquialism

To a non US English speaker it would understandably sound strange

To English speakers who've heard it and have given it any thought, it just sounds careless, or stupid

If someone were to point out something like this to me, I'd just say "oops", learn from it, and move on. I wouldn't double down on it. It's like defending 'would of', or 'supposably' - obvious mishearings of other words. People know what you mean; it is just that you are also telling them something you probably don't mean to.

Ha! According to the supreme court, Biden could explain all of this to Johnson and the rest of the republicans using guns.

If you can care less, why mention it? It is an empty statement, supporting nothing. It has no rhetorical impact at all, except that reinforces the idea in your audience that you haven't even a good grasp of the language you are using.

Trump has been overcharging the secret service for years. Why wouldn't efforts to limit his grifting be in place?

There's junk in that trunk

We are just so focused on the stupid horse race that we're not actually picking a leader.

This 'stupid horse race' is all that stands between us and four more years of Trump

Eh, it could be non-radioactive next week. That's not very likely, but it could be

Yeah, it's just like when you kill someone in an automobile accident. So long as you sell the car involved, you can pass the liability to the buyer

True, true. Funny how it's so much cheaper to own an elected official than it is to be one

With a billion dollars, I'd just buy enough congressman to make university free for everyone. They're not even that expensive

Being fit to be president and being a candidate with a good chance to win are very different things.

Right now, the Democrats need a candidate that can win. If this isn't their top priority, then how can anyone take seriously their claim that Trump threatens democracy itself. They have to pick a candidate that people really want