Robuu

To Dayton, via Springfield

You ain't kiddin

I like Lucy Blue's. I think it's on par with some of the late night NYC pizza places. I've never had Goodfella's, because there's always a line when I'm near it and I know I can just go to Lucy Blue's and skip all that nonsense.

troeros, both of these were mentioned by other people. But Lucy Blue is right near Goodfella's, serves pizza, and always has a smaller line. And Main Event is another gay bar downtown. One-by-one, Grindr/the internet, as well as gay friendliness of other establishments, have killed the gay bar scene in Cincinnati. Oh, and ODOT killed The Dock. And 21C killed the Subway. There was also some club in Longworth Hall that had a popular gay night. Can't remember the name of it. Shooters, On Broadway, Simon Says, Subway, the Dock, Below Zero, and Main Event were all simultaneously open just a few years ago. Also there was the Pink Pyramid shop (not a bar) which was closed down for selling poppers, IIRC. Clifton lost Golden Lions (the first gay bar in the city), Northside lost Bullfish's, Bronz, the Serpent, maybe others(?). There's just generally been a gay bar apocalypse in the city. I miss the days of Tuesday nights at Vertigo and Friday nights at Jacob's.

Curious if that's how you feel about the state passing restrictive abortion laws.

The Mayor of Elmwood Place was arrested after his involvement in a knock-down, drag-out brawl with his husband. So many questions. Starting with: who knew Elmwood Place had a gay mayor? https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/crime/crime-and-courts/2018/06/24/police-elmwood-place-mayor-husband-arrested-after-drunken-fight/729487002/

so what is a bump stock if not a component of a firearm? What is the different between a "part of a firearm" and a "component"? What's the difference between a component and an accessory? We'll see what the courts say; I think it could go either way. But, for example, if you put a shirt on, does it become a "part" or "component" of your body? No, but it could be considered an "accessory." That's the distinction.

Along with just shifting the tax burden, the board would probably shift so that the county appoints a majority of its members. People in the county are going to want better service, and they likely will not be willing to put up with the fare premiums outside Zone 1. Basically, there will be increased pressure to spread the same money thinner.

Change for 20-34 over time isn't a good measure, because lots of people in the group in 2005 or 2010 have aged out by 2016, just as people who were too young in 2005 or 2010 will be counted in 2016. Did you move the ages around? 9-23 in 2005 and 14-28 in 2010?

According to Amazon, the latter.

Definitely surprising. Hopefully this is the beginning of a trend. Importing young people with outside perspectives would be great for Cincinnati.

Doesn't who "counts" entirely depend on what you're trying to measure? If you're trying to measure where Millennials are moving, you don't count those who are staying in place.

Millenials have no wealth nor pay much in taxes so of course they don't. That doesn't explain why coastal cities attract so many businesses vs. e.g. Kansas.

Ludlow and Short Vine are a mix of students and non-students.

I don't have all the answers, and any attempt at a solution would take decades to tweak out unintended consequences (as those who have supported school vouchers are finding out). For the geographic/socioeconomic segregation issue: I think there is a lot to the Mount Laurel decisions, and what was found in the NJ state constitution should also be seen in the federal constitution by anyone who sees within it a mandate for equality (of opportunity or condition). A bonafide remedy there would most likely be some strong form of inclusive zoning, mandated on a federal level. For the school districts, I'm not sure. At a minimum, there couldn't be district boundaries, as they inherently create an uneven playing field. If they didn't have that effect, few would feel strongly about their removal. My real recommendation, and the point I was alluding to, isn't about policy but about the mental disposition we should have when thinking about these and other issues: that the premise of equality of opportunity is invalid. It doesn't exist, people would fight against implementing it as aggressively as they would fight for anything, and any time it's implicitly or explicitly used as a premise to justify a policy, that policy should be looked upon with great suspicion. Additionally, when someone espouses the belief that equality of opportunity should exist, questions about school districts and inclusive zoning (or other issues related to geographic/socioeconomic segregation) may be good litmus tests to gauge how serious they are -- how open are they to eliminating these barriers, or are they even willing to admit they function as barriers. (Again, my contention is they both preclude EoO.) People have a lot of emotions surrounding their schools and neighborhoods, so it's an area ripe for cognitive bias, which also makes it a good area for self-reflection.

So we've identified another hard barrier which, so long as it exists, will preclude equality of opportunity in this country.

Hope this is a sign of momentum building for non-bar/restaurant retail. Would be nice to see some more amenities for neighborhood residents, but if destination retail can be successful that would be huge.

Not a very exciting beer line-up.

Northside needs its Applebee's back.

Let's not delude ourselves into thinking that there's equality of opportunity in this country, or that associated gaps can be solved, while retaining school districts as they exist.

I want the Taqueria Mixteca food truck back. Other than that, I'm good on Mexican food in Dayton.

"School choice" is a propaganda term which infers there can't be a choice between different schools without privately-run schools funded by taxes. Any student can enroll in any non-magnet school in the Cincinnati district; even students from outside the district (neighborhood students currently receive priority in the case of limited slots). That could be called "school choice." Or what about extending that offer across all district borders? That would greatly expand school choice, without any charter schools.

It isn't just the online schools which have reported fraudulent numbers. But it's definitely true that it's much harder to verify enrollment and attendance for online schools.

These are pieces of swamp ontology which inevitably emerge from one-party rule. Republicans want charter schools, okay; Democrats don't like it. But if the Democrats had any influence, they could have provided a check on the Republicans' instincts to 1) reward campaign donors, and 2) provide insufficient regulations in the name of small government/free market/etc. principles.

One of my grade school friends lived on Coy. I vaguely remember playing in that park a few times, but usually he would come down to my house in Clifton, or we would hang out on Ludlow or in Burnet Woods.