dejected_warp_core

Agreed. Considering that the alternative to that is always higher food prices, it's political suicide to not do this.

A really good piece on the realities of this topic is here: https://youtu.be/badGHJLDpP8

TL;DW: Farmers thought they were voting for cheap labor and a bailout, like they got last time. They also thought that, as wealthy landowners^1^, they were on the "right side" of these disastrous trade policies and were going to be carried through this mess.

^1.^ I struggled with this concept at first. Things have changed a lot since the pre-WWII era that conjures up images of Ma & Pa Kent in a weathered century-home, on a lonely corn farm in Kansas. It's big business now. Good farm land isn't cheap, equipment is expensive, (legitimate) labor is expensive, fertilizer & irrigation costs a lot, pest control costs, crops are risky in general, and so on. When you work out how much money is moving around and what a farm's net worth is, these people are millionaires even if they're not in the black all the time.

Thank you for this much needed perspective. While the FCC's actions reek of overreach, ABC folding like a cheap card table just didn't sit well with me. Especially considering how CBS' parent company went to court first before cancelling Colbert. It makes a lot more sense now.

My experience with this film was overwhelmingly positive but cut the other way.

What I saw was a deliberate and not-at-all veiled allegory for classic narcissistic abuse, its victims, and how victimhood can be self-perpetuating until you get help and break free. I would go as far as to say that it's both affirming, supportive, and informative to that end. There's even a not-so-subtle explanation as to why you don't see group therapy for this sort of thing (it's on purpose and absolutely necessary).

Everything else is fun acting, action scenes, special effects, set dressing, homage to old horror films, you name it, it's in here. It all serves the story's core premise brilliantly and keeps an otherwise dreadful topic - perhaps all too real for some of the audience - palatable for the film's runtime.

Hook that up to digital auto-pay and you pretty much have what OP had before the policy change.

It's a little worse than that. Consider the intimate the contact between fido's hindquarters and that seat.

I went with "two potatoes from different fields", as it sounds more folksy:

Well, that's it for casting. Documentary coming summer of 2028.

Argh! Beat me to it. Here's a bonus pic.

Well, now you have charcoal to cook the next batch correctly.

It's not that they don't understand it. It's that they literally can't afford to adopt it.

Corporate ownership, combined with being publicly traded or privately investor funded, means that you have to increase shareholder value. Stock dividends aren't enough. So, they use the only play that they know: scale the company up.

Problem is: you can scale art, but scaling software is very hard. Book publishers and record labels figured this out ages ago: keep adding more artists and more products. Meanwhile, AAA game studios keep stacking bodies onto existing IPs, making fewer yet bigger software products instead. Meanwhile, they keep getting bodied by small upstarts like Team Cherry, because they have a better effort:payout ratio. If everyone just ran their game companies like Penguin Random House instead of Microsoft, they'd be in better shape.