Doesn't work on Firefox mobile. Neither "mobile" site or Desktop versions. Hitting "Next/Enter" on my keyboard does nothing, there is no Submit button that I can see, and refreshing the page just resets all fields to defaults.

I don't want an Intel with 4gb RAM and a 256GB spinning drive, and OS included? No thanks. Without being able to filter results, its just another craigslist/amazon/newegg front-end ... a less useful one.

Not here in the midwestern US, nor when/where I was growing up on the Southern California coast. Where are you that fish is ever, let alone often cheaper than beef?

Imagine wondering how claiming the armed electinon-interfering ass-hats are in the majority would scare people away from the polls.

Its difficult enough to convince people who see this country for what it is and has always been that voting is safe, ethical and worthwhile without you and people like you repeating MAGA talking points about how their numbers are increasing, when the opposite is the case.

Right, that's why Kamala is ahead in the polls. You are confusing escalating rhetoric and the volume of such for the number of people that believe that garbage. They are spamming their gibberish everywhere because they know they won't win the election if enough people turn out to vote...

... but sure, go on pretending Andrew Tate represents the average American man. If you keep it up, you can scare enough women and young voters away from the polls to make a difference, and won't that be just a joy for any of us with an ounce of sense to deal with?

The idea that Republicans/conservatives are surging in numbers/influence/popularity is itself a MAGA talking point. The numbers do NOT bear it out.

Yes, you're missing that subsidies ensure the same amount of beef gets produced no matter the demand. In fact, that amount is set higher than demand. Demand is artificially increased due to the high availability and low prices resulting from these policies. Removing the subsidies would lower both Availability and Demand, as the lowered availability would increase prices.

TL;DR: Consumption gender ratios have NOTHING to do with the amount of beef that is being produced, nor, therefore, its impacts on the environment.

I can only restate the obvious so many times, and I HAVE already restated the facts on this at least twice prior to your question. Are you dense, or just insincere?

Incels gave up on being "manly enough". Their whole schtick is that its "un-fair" that "only the manliest men get laid", and that they believe they deserve sex just for being born with a dick.

I'm not saying all the "red-pill"/"sigma-pill"/"incel" groups/narratives don't feed into eachother, but you've gotta realize these people are already in the minority. It's not their influence keeping the subsidies going, it's the public's wallets keeping demand just high-enough to "justify" the subsidies, and the fact that the subsidies are backed by decades of established law.

There is no point trying to reason with the die-hards that will keep on consuming long after increased prices drive the rest of us away from beef consumption. The subsidies that keep their bull-shit lifestyles affordable and convenient should be the focus of our efforts.

Let them waste more money on being single and lonely. Their pocket-books will shout at them louder and more convincingly than the rest of us ever could.

Maybe, but that's just to keep demand anywhere near high enough to consume the products that subsidies ensure they will be producing anyways, so they can argue that the current subsidies are necessary.

Imagine thinking toxic masculinity is a bigger problem for this issue than beef/dairy subsidies and entrenched market forces. Nice distraction piece, NPR.

Nah, how about "fish is expensive and chicken is unethical"? Meanwhile, beef is subsidized all to hell, and NPR is focused on the wrong issue. We're long past the point where it looks like they are just running interference for industries that don't want to change.

Men who refuse to acknowlege there is a problem with beef aren't the ones having a problem with attempting to eat less of it. Its market forces all the way down; Less available and/or more expensive beef is what it will take to wean the die-hards.

Not hard to put both vehicles in both names. I don't think they are "arguing" anything, just stating a legal fact about marital property.

A state that pays more to the Federal Government than it gets back in funding need fear nothing like so.

The rest of the US should be afraid of such states secceeding. This would be the opposite of the last civil war, as back then it was the less economically powerful, less populous states attempting to split.

Low administrative overhead. High-cost, high-margin products. It's not turning a profit on its own that's all that difficult once you've got the ball rolling, its turning a profit that will keep scummy executives, shareholders, and/or venture capitalists happy.