Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

Pretentious people like you are why people like Sebby decided to get trump elected, nttawwt, no offense.

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

I've been in some bars with some pretty stupid names that turned out to be amazing. This wasn't one of those times. Should have known. But I used to go to a place called The Lounge, back in the day in Minneapolis, and that place was a lot of fun. And I think you can agree that the name is exceedingly stupid.

Also, I don't know anything about Uptown.

TM

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

There's much that's hard to sort out in this, but yeah, the Green line is relatively recent and may not have been there when you were here. Downtown to downtown is kinda slow though, so for an evening gig a ride share isn't a terrible idea. Taxis are ridiculously expensive here, though.

Mind you, there was no "Prince's bar" (you mean the club, Glam Slam?) for far longer than that.

If you're only here overnight or two nights for a gig at the Amsterdam, staying at the St Paul Hotel or something would be bearable.

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

To be fair, I'm not sure where I would send you (or anyone) for drinks in Uptown. As Flower mentioned, LynLake, just a bit east, you could do Iron Door, Bryant Lake Bowl or LynLake Brewing. Used to like Williams for its many taps but that's kinda outweighed by the clientele for me now.

Then again I'm old, have a kid and don't get out as much anymore too.

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

Sorry for the typos. I would far prefer a train ride as I feel it makes me a "local," in some small way. I was just curious because it couldn't have been an option for me then, or I feel i would have. I don't know why i thought there was a Prince's bar. Was there a show bar in Purple Rain that is downtown? Is there a station anywhere near that area of Minneapolis?

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

Much of Purple Rain takes place at First Avenue, the former bus station and legendary music venue on the eponymous avenue, at 7th Street. If that's what you meant by Prince Bar, fair enough. He never owned it and it was famous beyond him too, but it was a big part of the movie.

There is a light rail stop just over two blocks away, but the train to St Paul is newer than the train to the airport.

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

Is there a place where he could view some in-the-wild cake eaters?

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

I was just kidding! My daughter goes to a cake-eater private school in St. Paul. I go there every weekday! Also, I often ride carbon fiber bikes to St. Paul in bright skin-tight lycra, with my other wealthy bike-riding friends. Man. Of. The. People.

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

The Lounge was really great. Generic name notwithstanding.

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

I can get him the secret directions to the start of an un-sanctioned fixed-gear cyclocross gravel grinder, where doctors and lawyers with $6,000 bikes get in touch with their "underground racing" alter egos. Is that what you are thinking about? Otherwise, not sure I can help because I am a little out of touch with the triathlon and Tough Mudder scenes.

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

The other place I posted up for awhile last summer is Union. Had alumni and work people roll through from early dinner to late night up on the roof. The regular space is corny as fuck, but the rooftop area was fairly chill. And it reminded me a bit of The Lounge later in the night when there was a real influx of Somalis (holy shit do they have an unfair percentage of hot women). Back in the days of The Lounge, the Somali community wasn't as established, but the ones who showed up were fucking gorgeous and kept me coming back.

This last visit to MN, I spent some time at Archer House's the Tavern, which has live music and features a general sense of boredom and depression.

TM

Re: MSP Trip Bleg
 

I was just making a joke about Edina.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Excellent thread exposing problems with libertarianism here, from Ted Frank, who is no lefty.

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

Kris Kobach, ftw. Does he pick up those costs himself, or do the taxpayers of Kansas get to cover them?

Re: We are all Slave now.
 

No. I just made the point that the "rich" have voted themselves unhealthy levels of wealth via control of legislators about ten times during this discussion. But never mind that. Let's move on to what you say I said, which is always more important...

You don't. Neither do I. I don't think even the ordinary people understand their views, or have articulated them beyond vague anger and frustration, as most of them are uninformed, incurious, and narrow minded.

When I say we don't understand what Joe Sixpack desires, I'm not criticizing us. Why would anyone want to immerse himself in studying the frequently incoherent views of populists? I'm simply stating a fact.

What would the alternative be? A system which allowed one party to take property from another?

I think the present system is stagnant, and characterized best as rentier capitalism. It's predatory in many regards, and it is creating an old English class system, which ultimately stifles both culture and innovation. I think we both agree it should be turned upside down and some of the accumulated wealth spread to others who'd spend it more wisely. We just differ on how that should be done.

You seem to wish the state to administer transfers. I wish the state to mandate transfers in the form of universal income, and not engage in any administration beyond that. Everybody gets a check every month. After that, you're on your own.

You could read it that way. But I am quite comfortable stating the following: "If you allow people, rich or poor, to vote themselves transfers or benefits from the system, without vigilant restriction, you set a state on a course to bankruptcy, without exception."

Incorrect. The rich clearly cannot be trusted to manage our economic policies. Nor can the upper middle class, or even the middle class. They will almost always vote their own narrow self interests.

The cure for the rich making a mess of the economy is not allowing the poor to vote themselves a huge pile of new or enhanced transfers. The cure is to stop the rich from doing so.

I would have bailed out the lower and middle classes and put all the failing banks into receivership. The argument, "We had to save the banks with the bailout!" always struck me as bullshit. We could have saved them with the bailout while also taking them over directly, as we did AIG. We could have prioritized homeowners over investors.

You realize this is all much easier if the govt did 50% less than it currently does? Cut the govt services (including most notably defense) and administration and you'll lower people's taxes. If a guy sees a $5000 decrease in taxes because we cut a variety of items (state and fed), he's a hell of a lot less likely to whine about the tax that pays for schools.

Inequality is like oil. We aren't going to stop burning oil until climate change becomes so severe we have no choice but to stop. We aren't going to do anything to fix this new gilded age in which we live until something like a French Revolution is afoot.

I actually am not against a more truly representative govt. I just don't think it's possible. Sure, we could see a progressive wave that causes the poor to have a greater say. But it'll be fixes at the margins. It'll do little more than placate and keep the poor under control. The system always reverts to the default setting: Doing what the moneyed want it to do.

When people who "already have the power" abuse it, they inevitably go too far and the system corrects. (Things often turn out badly for them, btw...) I'd love to see a sensible fix like universal income. But it's never going to happen. So I say, leave the Antoinettes to learn the difference between pigs and hogs.

You might say, there'll be no such upheaval. Maybe. Maybe not. But when that sort of stuff does happen, it's always a surprise. Like bankruptcy. Slow, slow, slow... then all of the sudden, fucked.