That’s totally fair. Although I’m not sure how you figure that the Portland area isn’t a big part of the PNW.

Hold my beer…

Burgerville is pretty good if you live in the PNW. It’s downsides are that it’s overpriced for what you get and it’s had some labor issues that don’t put ownership in a good light.

In the first movie he is searching for The Ark of the Covenant, but otherwise you are correct.

Windows is emphatically not the same thing as Android. They’re two entirely different OS’s. No doubt you know this, it just seems like you momentarily lost the plot and made it about Windows vs Mac, when what we’re really talking about is iOS vs Android.

Also Columbia owns brands like Prana and Mountain Hardware, so if you want higher quality stuff that’s still basically Columbia, you have plenty of options.

The same is true of many other companies.

I think it’s a case of the tyranny of minor differences and what people are used to. My personal phone is an android and I’m used to it and like it, while my work phone is an iPhone and I use it for entirely different work-related reasons that it’s great for.

Never shall the two meet! I actually like having my work and private lives segregated into two separate OS’s that have little if any overlap.

I have at least a nodding acquaintance with that work and while I think it’s worth considering and talking about, I don’t find it to be at all the most convincing explanation for conservatism and am far more persuaded by conservatism as being motivated by a desire for the preservation of hierarchy that manifests itself through said psychological traits, but that is the ultimate prior that informs them. Otherwise we would expect to see liberalism and conservatism more evenly distributed throughout our population, as with other psychological traits, but we don’t, to the contrary, they are very geographically dependent.

So while I don’t think that psychology has nothing to say about the issue, I definitely don’t think that its the most important factor.

Not really. The real answer is that different parts of the federal government are underfunded or overfunded according to political ideology and expedience. This is a great example; the SSA is underfunded while the military is overfunded which results in clear performance differences.

You’ll never hear a conservative bitch about the US military saying that it can’t do anything right, and it’s like, yeah, duh, because it has a huge fucking budget and basically gets anything it asks for.

Social safety net programs? Not so much.

My father in law doesn’t like music. He doesn’t dislike it either, he’s just indifferent. Apart from that he’s just your garden variety somewhat-curmudgeonly 80-year-old dude.

I am a union member so this isn’t a thing that happens. If management does something unacceptable, we do a strike authorization vote which, if passed by the membership, starts a clock ticking down to strike time and management knows that they are on notice and need to start negotiations.

All of which is just to say that unions are good for workers, regardless of what kind of bullshit you may have been led to believe.

I’m pretty happy with Google Fi. I realize it’s Google, which isn’t great, but at least they deliver exactly what they say they will and the price is always exactly as advertised.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they are taking a loss on it just to gain market share. They can afford it.

My work-around was to never read replies to my comments unless I had good reason to think they would be intelligent. Ultimately this meant that I only really read replies to comments made in niche subs.

It’s also the case that several things can be true at once. Like, maybe you are part of the reddit mob-mentality, but on certain issues you have opinions that very much go against the grain.

It’s very true. Cable networks are private property whereas broadcast bandwidth is public property. That’s the difference. It creates two very disparate regulatory environments.

It’s very true. Cable networks are private property whereas broadcast bandwidth is public property. That’s the difference. It creates two very disparate regulatory environments.

It’s very true. Cable networks are private property whereas broadcast bandwidth is public property. That’s the difference. It creates two very disparate regulatory environments.

It’s very true. Cable networks are private property whereas broadcast bandwidth is public property. That’s the difference. It creates two very disparate regulatory environments.

This is correct. The idea is that bandwidth is public property and as such holding a license to use part of it entails public obligations. This is why radio stations are required to repeat their identification a certain number of times per hour, for example.

Cable networks are privately owned and therefore were never subject to the same kinds of regulation.

The internet itself is far more to blame than either of the factors you cite. Why? Because it destroyed journalism’s traditional revenue model and in so doing murdered local news. Only the biggest legacy news organizations can still make ends meet through a subscription base, so the result is that everyone else is left churning out bullshit clickbait articles in a competition for views.

“Information wants to be free,” was the mantra of the early internet, and that’s nice as far as it goes, but good journalism is expensive and when we gut the revenue stream of an entire industry, we shouldn’t be surprised that what’s left kind of sucks.