Practicality of languages?

/prog/, I have been searching your archives, and I come to you presenting a new question: Is LISP actually as impractical as it's been said it is? I want to learn a language that I can use as a career, and I want to learn it first. Would learning CL be a mistake if say, I were to learn Ruby later on and make a living making Ruby-based software?

ITT we discuss the real, unbiased usability of languages based on a few criteria (but they should be organized separately, these qualities shouldn't affect each other.)
Fun
Usability
Career
Efficiency of code
Etc.

So far from what I've seen it goes like this:
Company-practicality:
1. C
2. C++
3. Ruby
4. Perl
5. Java
6. LISP
7. PHP
~
100. VB

Fun:
1. LISP
2. Ruby
3. Perl
5. Python
4. C
5. C++
6. Java
~
99. PHP
100. VB

Usability:
1/2. LISP
1/2. C
3. C++
4. Ruby
5. Perl
6. Python
7. Java
~
100. VB

I know there are some left out on this list, but mostly because these are the ones /prog/ talks about the most.

Discuss, and feel free to call me an uneducated retard, even though I do realize that the languages listed here aren't the same style programming.

OP we know you aren't going to learn to program anyway, at best you will write a "hello world" then get bored.  This post is dumb, the most practical languages for getting a job would be the ones most used in industry, and there are handy statistics for that.  Fun and usability are both personal preference.  For instance I find Java fun and usable, and Lisp not fun and not usable, but there are many here who have been reading to much Paul Graham and think the opposite is true.

>>2
Practicality from a business perspective is almost always ease of maintainability, and hiring Lisp programmers is by no means easy since most of them are douchebags.