2000--2001--2002--2003--2004--2005--2006--2007--2008--2009
Yes, it has been a decade
so all 'dem new liberals finally realizing that obama isn't a messiah? sweet
I suppose it's a wet dream to hope that some of them will actually, y'know, engage politics instead of going along with a crowd
[QUOTE=BrickInHead;19344732]so all 'dem new liberals finally realizing that obama isn't a messiah? sweet
I suppose it's a wet dream to hope that some of them will actually, y'know, engage politics instead of going along with a crowd[/QUOTE]
They engaged in plenty of politics when they kicked the Republicans out of the White House, Senate, and House.
perhaps it has something to do with the failure of the public option, which a majority of americans supported
[QUOTE=Ohim;19339256]It's not even a new decade, it's 1-9. The end of 2010 will be a new decade.[/QUOTE]
he's right, technically.
see, there was no year 0. in fact, 2000, 1990, 1980, and so on aren't the start of decades either
but y'know fuck technicality, this decade sucked ass i want a new one
[QUOTE=Savaril;19348183]he's right, technically.
see, there was no year 0. in fact, 2000, 1990, 1980, and so on aren't the start of decades either
but y'know fuck technicality, this decade sucked ass i want a new one[/QUOTE]
This man speaks truth.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;19342877]No shit. Over the last decade we invaded and occupied 2 countries, watched the two tallest buildings in New York collapse and kill 3,000 someodd people, had our retirement accounts almost entirely wiped out, saw New Orleans get completely demolished, slogged through $5 a gallon gas, had hundreds of billions in tax money given to the very people who destroyed our retirement accounts, and just in the last year got hit with a massive unemployment wave.
It was a fucking miserable 10 years for everyone, I'm surprised even that many people are still optimistic. The wars aren't ending any time soon, and the coming decade is just going to bring ever more crushing overpopulation and ever more scarce and expensive resources. I have a feeling the good days are permanently behind us.[/QUOTE]
You're forgetting about the complete erosion of civil rights and the almost fascist like administration that Bush practically put into place. And the private armies and soaring national debt we're in. Coupled with the rapidly declining social stability and complete loss of public morality. But yeah, everything else you said is essential true, and I don't even want to think about the Malthusian Catastrophe that's going to come up in the near future.
On the other hand, we should probably drink, smoke, fuck like rabbits and party while we still can before the world ends.
Well I started off last decade a few months into school.
So I'm hoping for a better start this decade.
Yes, because 1,160 pessimists pestered on a telephone by a contractor for the "Communist News Network", represents the entire population accurately.
So much for this:
[img]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2247/2231258092_43d8e672b5.jpg[/img]
:sigh:
[QUOTE=Ohim;19339553]Sigh, you're so dumb it amazes me.
A decade = 1 full year being completed. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
The 10th ain't been completed.
It's funny how stupid you guys are on Facepunch.[/QUOTE]
ladies and gentlemen, the 010'er
[QUOTE=Savaril;19348183]he's right, technically.
see, there was no year 0. in fact, 2000, 1990, 1980, and so on aren't the start of decades either
but y'know fuck technicality, this decade sucked ass i want a new one[/QUOTE]
uh, no
what are you talking about.
[editline]05:43PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Morphology53;19349998]Yes, because 1,160 pessimists pestered on a telephone by a contractor for the "Communist News Network", represents the entire population accurately.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the Communist news network exists
nice try though
[QUOTE=Ohim;19339553]Sigh, you're so dumb it amazes me.
A decade = 1 full year being completed. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
The 10th ain't been completed.
It's funny how stupid you guys are on Facepunch.[/QUOTE]
So, wait. 2000 wasn't a year? :downs:
[QUOTE=Trotsky;19350912][QUOTE=Savaril;19348183]he's right, technically.
see, there was no year 0. in fact, 2000, 1990, 1980, and so on aren't the start of decades either
but y'know fuck technicality, this decade sucked ass i want a new one[/QUOTE]
uh, no
what are you talking about.
[editline]05:43PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Morphology53;19349998]Yes, because 1,160 pessimists pestered on a telephone by a contractor for the "Communist News Network", represents the entire population accurately.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the Communist news network exists
nice try though[/QUOTE]
That "woosh" sound was the joke soaring far above your head, FYI.
[QUOTE=Morphology53;19353128]That "woosh" sound was the joke soaring far above your head, FYI.[/QUOTE]
oh, well I certainly feel dumb
Still waiting for the great US-Russian war, or for nukes.
No shit Americans aren't hopeful for the feature we have idiots and puppets running our country fucking us up the ass daily and then thrusting a jab to the gut over and over.
I agree with the user above me 100%
[QUOTE=halo2142;19353391]No shit Americans aren't hopeful for the feature we have idiots and puppets running our country fucking us up the ass daily and then thrusting a jab to the gut over and over.[/QUOTE]
I think you're over dramatizing your predicament.
It is a start of a New Decade even CNN said so! Oh wait is CNN wrong like Fox News!? Oh my god! Humans making mistakes preposterous! Lets make fun of them for it! (ITT Fox news is the most watched News network I wonder why ;).)
[QUOTE=Ohim;19353441]I agree with the user above me 100%[/QUOTE]
You've already been disproven and you're only hurting your reputation more.
haha he edited.
[QUOTE=Ohim;19353441]If you’re thinking tomorrow is the start of a new decade, you are one year too early. The next decade doesn’t start until January 1, 2011. It seems when it comes to the calendar, many people can’t count. I remember when everyone thought Y2K was the start of the new millennium. Those are the same people who think the new decade starts on 1st Jan 2010
Simple logic and the ability to count will tell you when a new decade or millennium begins and end. A decade is ten years. Since there was no year zero, ten years is year 1 to 10 and a new decade starts at year 11. In other words, the last decade was 2001 to 2010. We are heading into the end of the decade, not the start of new one.
I guess this mistake isn’t as a bad as the Y2K mistake when everyone though January 1, 2000 was the start of the 21st century and the new millennium. Way more people were talking about that as year 2000 approached. It’s a good thing I only have to deal with that once every 1000 years. However, enough people are calling 2010 the start of a new decade to irritate me enough to write this post.[/QUOTE]
but the way most people define a decade is by the second-to-last digit, and ranges from *0 to *9. for example, the 1990's, the 1960's, the 1880's. by your logic, the actual year of 1990 isn't part of the 90's, but 2000 is, which makes no sense whatsoever.
so while you may be technically right, you're technically wrong at the same time.
also, I'd like to consider 1 B.C. to be the start of the decade that 1-9 A.D. were in. if you think about it, technically it kinda counts as 0 A.D.... I'm sure someone here knows what I'm trying to say and will be able to explain it better.
EDIT: I'm keeping this post here just to show everyone the stupidity he edited. 25 boxes and I'll remove it.
[QUOTE=Ohim;19353441]If you’re thinking tomorrow is the start of a new decade, you are one year too early. The next decade doesn’t start until January 1, 2011. It seems when it comes to the calendar, many people can’t count. I remember when everyone thought Y2K was the start of the new millennium. Those are the same people who think the new decade starts tomorrow.
Simple logic and the ability to count will tell you when a new decade or millennium begins and end. A decade is ten years. Since there was no year zero, ten years is year 1 to 10 and a new decade starts at year 11. In other words, the last decade was 2001 to 2010. We are heading into the end of the decade, not the start of new one.
I guess this mistake isn’t as a bad as the Y2K mistake when everyone though January 1, 2000 was the start of the 21st century and the new millennium. Way more people were talking about that as year 2000 approached. It’s a good thing I only have to deal with that once every 1000 years. However, enough people are calling 2010 the start of a new decade to irritate me enough to write this post.[/QUOTE]
Please, go away. You are incredibly retarded
Some writers like to point out that since the common calendar starts from the year 1, its first full decade contained the years from 1 to 10, the second decade from 11 to 20, and so on. The interval from the year 2001 to 2010 could thus be called the 201st decade, using ordinal numbers. However, contrary to practices in referencing centuries, ordinal references to decades are quite uncommon.
copypasta'd wikipedia.
[QUOTE=Ohim;19339553]Sigh, you're so dumb it amazes me.
A decade = 1 full year being completed. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
The 10th ain't been completed.
It's funny how stupid you guys are on Facepunch.[/QUOTE]
It's funny how you try to seem smart.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.