Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Up to my mid 30s, I would jump at the "I know a lady...." food recommendations. In my mid 50s now and with things taking way longer to heal for any and everything, I definitely am not doing the "I know a lady..." thing.

I admire y'alls conviction to finding great food.

Posted

Back in the mid-2000s, there was a woman named Celia who had a taco truck that was an old pop-up trailer. She was off of East 1st back when it was still sketchy as fuck after dark. Only open on the weekends after 10 pm. Id drive over at 3 in the morning just for those tacos. Best ever. No signage, just her shitty little work space, but everyone knew her name and those tacos. I was the only gringo there and guys would come up and tell me I was fearless showing up, but respected the fact I was there. 

"If you have to kill me, please wait until after Ive eaten. "

Posted
3 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

Up to my mid 30s, I would jump at the "I know a lady...." food recommendations. In my mid 50s now and with things taking way longer to heal for any and everything, I definitely am not doing the "I know a lady..." thing.

I admire y'alls conviction to finding great food.

Well, at least you see the lady cooking. God knows who is in the kitchen of your favorite restaurant. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Back in the day when I worked on the east side, there was a dude that had a bike (think of the ice cream tricycle with the bin on the front) that would sell a dozen tamales for like 4 or 5 bucks.  Man, those might be the best tamales I ever had.  Thanks to gentrification, those guys have long been pushed aside I'm sure!  

Posted

I don't know anything about Selena Xie but I'll take anyone over that useless-corpse-of-a-council member Paige Ellis. 

 

 

Quote

AUSTIN (KXAN) — Both Austin City Council Member Paige Ellis and Selena Xie, an Austin-Travis County EMS commander and the former president of the Austin EMS Association, announced they will run for the Austin City Council District 8 seat next year.

“As a frontline worker, I don’t work from home—and I don’t think our City Council should either,” Xie said Wednesday. “I came to the decision to run after meeting with numerous district residents from many different backgrounds. They all said the same thing—that D8 deserves a Councilmember who shows up. On council, I will bring the same energy to improving affordability, public safety, infrastructure, the environment, constituent services, and communication with residents to District 8 that I brought as EMS Association President. I know we can do better for the people who I’ve been proud to serve.”

 

Posted
On 6/16/2025 at 5:17 PM, crash_davis said:

The list only goes 10. I'm sure that area is 11 on the list. Actually I'm 100% positive.

No - it's 12. Behind Dove Springs. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
On 6/16/2025 at 5:28 PM, Brisketexan said:

The best places are the ones that don't even have names.  Just identified as "the taco lady off 183 near the Chevron station," stuff like that.

My favorite place in Bastrop is a kitchen sharing a space in a gas station that makes pollos asaderos and barbacoa and carnitas and the (insert Asian nationality here) guys running the convenience store overcharge the shit out of everything. 

Posted
8 minutes ago, royiv said:

I’m reserving judgement until you provide a picture of the house so we can determine whether or not the green painted brick is ugly.

I actually haven’t seen the house, just the general area it’s in. I suppose I could hit the Kentucky Deluxe, light up a Virginia Slim, grab my dog and go for a long walk to find it, just like the gutter slug in the video.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Posted

The school consolidation virtual open house is next week. We are all getting proper fucked with this.

If you filled out the school consolidation survey a few weeks ago, there were several questions that tried to trick you into agreeing to consolidate your home school. Im sure they’ll pull out that data to show we want this.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
On 6/18/2025 at 2:16 PM, Wally Pryor said:

I don't know anything about Selena Xie but I'll take anyone over that useless-corpse-of-a-council member Paige Ellis. 

 

 

 

I mean, Natasha Harper-Madison might be the corpse on the Dais.  Who holds the record on remoting in to ACC meetings the most via Zoom?  Hell, I'm pretty sure she might own the most unexcused absences in city council history.

Posted
6 minutes ago, PvilleStang said:

I mean, Natasha Harper-Madison might be the corpse on the Dais.  Who holds the record on remoting in to ACC meetings the most via Zoom?  Hell, I'm pretty sure she might own the most unexcused absences in city council history.

Also apparently only has one staffer left, everyone else quit.  

Posted
On 6/18/2025 at 9:39 PM, Mittens said:

What is fucking awesome about you, Austin?

Zilker Park as the sun goes down.

IMG_0519.thumb.jpeg.eab3554782482339561bc4c87c050f6a.jpeg

 

Bottom left.  Both GSP's are dialed in on whomever is taking the pic.  Such great dogs.  Then you have pedo-bob on the lower right wondering where his life went wrong.  

Posted
On 6/18/2025 at 9:39 PM, Mittens said:

What is fucking awesome about you, Austin?

Zilker Park as the sun goes down.

IMG_0519.thumb.jpeg.eab3554782482339561bc4c87c050f6a.jpeg

 

That air quality, though. 

Posted
33 minutes ago, Js1 said:

IMG_1847.thumb.jpeg.058d40d7b696c53dc8662459f35f12e0.jpeg

image.gif.a632f5a3ddd3cb099d54874137df8fe2.gif

I've been wondering why aspiring CM's haven't been trying a "lower taxes" platform.  Maybe affordability is a code for it but lower taxes is clearer.  

Posted
10 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

I've been wondering why aspiring CM's haven't been trying a "lower taxes" platform.  Maybe affordability is a code for it but lower taxes is clearer.  

"Affordability" is 100% not about lower taxes in an Austin political ad (or any other big city political ad).  It is code for "I promise to tax "rich" people more and then pretend to give free shit to poor people while endorsing policies that make things more expensive for everyone."  It's bait for burnouts and bottom dwellers.  It's lower than buying votes, as it is just an empty promise to buy votes.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, LCHorn said:

I've been wondering why aspiring CM's haven't been trying a "lower taxes" platform.  Maybe affordability is a code for it but lower taxes is clearer.  

Because (and I’ve seen private research on this) it mostly doesn’t hang outside of some specific voter groups in specific places.
First, among homeowners, City taxes don’t move the needle compared to the other taxing entities, let alone the housing shortage in central Austin and our truly stupendous income inequality, particularly between college graduate+ private sector workers and our massive pool of college graduate+ public sector workers. It works a little for retired, house rich long term residents in places like Hyde Park, Bouldin Creek, near-east Austin and other neighborhoods where they have seen their tax bills skyrocket along with home’s value but live on a fixed income.
But more importantly, second, the affordability problem is most acute for renters who would like to buy a home close to where they work, or at least rent one, and can’t. They aren’t looking at the component cost structures, they are looking at the price tag. 

 

3 hours ago, PvilleStang said:

I mean, Natasha Harper-Madison might be the corpse on the Dais.  Who holds the record on remoting in to ACC meetings the most via Zoom?  Hell, I'm pretty sure she might own the most unexcused absences in city council history.

The shame of it is that she’s the most politically gifted and skilled member of council since 90’s era Kirk Watson. It’s a terrible waste and a real tragedy for the city. She had it all. 

 

1 hour ago, Samson's Wig said:

It is code for "I promise to tax "rich" people more and then pretend to give free shit to poor people while endorsing policies that make things more expensive for everyone."  It's bait for burnouts and bottom dwellers.  It's lower than buying votes, as it is just an empty promise to buy votes.

Nonsense. It’s code for “let the market build more housing.” You don’t know what or who you are talking about. Stop listening to KLBJ-AM. 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted
19 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

First, among homeowners, City taxes don’t move the needle compared to the other taxing entities, let alone the housing shortage in central Austin and our truly stupendous income inequality, particularly between college graduate+ private sector workers and our massive pool of college graduate+ public sector workers.

I don't disagree with what I think you're saying (in effect, city taxes make up a relatively small percentage of the property tax burden between AISD, Travis County, and various special districts), but that's policy and I'm talking campaigns.  

Particularly central-west, I would have thought someone would want to run on a "your taxes are too high" platform, at least as a way to differentiate themselves in a primary and/or code themselves GOP friendly (perhaps the latter is why it would be considered ineffective).  

Somewhat adjacent to this, I got a wild hair up my ass a few months ago and started digging into Travis County's expenditures and there was a lot less fat than I would have imagined.  

Posted
45 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Particularly central-west, I would have thought someone would want to run on a "your taxes are too high" platform, at least as a way to differentiate themselves in a primary and/or code themselves GOP friendly (perhaps the latter is why it would be considered ineffective).  

I hear you, and it certainly can be a component of a strong campaign, see Kathy Tovo, Jackie Goodman (RIP), and Pio Renteria. But to your point, it’s a very narrow path unless you have a shitload of retired homeowners in the district. As for “GOP coding,” it’s not necessarily a negative (esp in D6) because high propensity Austin city election voters tend to be very focused on local issues, like Taxes. But likewise,  the appeal is limited because they also tend to be Democrats. 
 

 

45 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

Somewhat adjacent to this, I got a wild hair up my ass a few months ago and started digging into Travis County's expenditures and there was a lot less fat than I would have imagined.  

I don’t know what to tell you. Nobody likes to hear it on this thread, but Travis County and Austin (outside of the 2018-2023 leadership vacuum) runs pretty well.

I’m just relieved that we didn’t adopt a strong Mayor system. Watson would probably do OK, but in general, well paid  professional City Managers and well paid County Judges and Commissioners run a far tighter ship than poorly-paid mayors and council members chosen from a pool of those willing to do a thankless job for nothing, on the basis of whoever performs the most pleasing mouth-noises for the worst people in town.

Posted
23 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Nonsense. It’s code for “let the market build more housing.” You don’t know what or who you are talking about. Stop listening to KLBJ-AM. 

I haven't listened to terrestrial radio in over fifteen years outside of public radio, and was never an AM radio guy outside of Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell when I found myself driving late at night on road trips.  Still, I appreciate your consistency in pigeonholing anyone you perceive as disagreeing with your take on this subject.   As LCHorn already pointed out, the discussion was about the politics of the message, not the realities of property taxation or how to improve housing affordability.  "Let the market build more housing" is simply restating the affordability message into your preferred talking point on the subject, but it ignores the blatant appeal to the "eat the rich" crowd in Austin.  Perhaps I'm too cynical, or you're too naive, or most likely a bit of both.  Getting elected in this town isn't complicated.  The playbook hasn't changed much for a long time.  It's also why not much has changed in Austin for a long time.  No elected official in this city will do a damn thing to make things more affordable, because there simply isn't much they can do to make that happen. It's empty language, but it works. You hear it in political campaigns in every major city in this country, and it's as empty in every other city as it is here.  You know all this, but chose to be rude because you think I fit some NIMBY boogieman mold or something.  Sorry to disappoint.   In principle, I agree with your "build more housing" mantra. I'm admittedly a bit skeptical about developers executing the idea in a manner that improves anything for working-class Austinites, or restated, I'm unconvinced that city leadersrhip has the means to control the developers through the process in a manner that results in a benefit to the working class, but the core concept is sound.

 

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I’m just relieved that we didn’t adopt a strong Mayor system. Watson would probably do OK, but in general, well paid  professional City Managers and well paid County Judges and Commissioners run a far tighter ship than poorly-paid mayors and council members chosen from a pool of those willing to do a thankless job for nothing, on the basis of whoever performs the most pleasing mouth-noises for the worst people in town.

Agreed. 

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

I haven't listened to terrestrial radio in over fifteen years outside of public radio, and was never an AM radio guy outside of Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell when I found myself driving late at night on road trips.  Still, I appreciate your consistency in pigeonholing anyone you perceive as disagreeing with your take on this subject. 

Well my apologies, it’s just that when I hear things as factually incorrect and disconnected from the reality of politics in Austin as that, I assume it came from Mark, Melinda, Todd Jeffries, and whoever else is operating the bilge pump at 590. 

26 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

As LCHorn already pointed out, the discussion was about the politics of the message, not the realities of property taxation or how to improve housing affordability.  "Let the market build more housing" is simply restating the affordability message into your preferred talking point on the subject, but it ignores the blatant appeal to the "eat the rich" crowd in Austin. 

No. I’m telling you it’s not a matter of my preference, within the coalitional world of Austin politics that particular use of affordability above means “let the market build more housing.” That’s in contrast to how Kathy Tovo used it, when it was primarily code for “increase the homestead exemption.”

Literally no council candidate that I am familiar with in 30+ years of paying close attention has ever used affordability to sell a “tax the rich” and give “free shit to the poor” message. That’s just nonsense.

And by the way you’re also specifically wrong in another way, and I cannot emphasize this strongly enough. As used above by that particular candidate, it is VERY MUCH about how to improve housing affordability, particularly among middle class public sector workers. It is 100% about that. 
 

26 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

Perhaps I'm too cynical, or you're too naive, or most likely a bit of both. 


You aren’t cynical, you’re just uninformed. And since I spent the better part of two decades in the various weeds of appointed semi-officialdom in this town dealing with the Council’s many own-goals, I assure you I am the furthest thing from naive. 
 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted
28 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

the bilge pump at 590.

 

23 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Lol - bullseye!

I, too, chortled at that one.  

 

54 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

No elected official in this city will do a damn thing to make things more affordable, because there simply isn't much they can do to make that happen.

If I might rebut on this, there's a number of efforts going on simultaneously all working towards this goal.  I'd also suggest there's a majority on the council currently that are very pro-affordability, at least conceptually, and not in a "let's campaign on this and then overly serve NIMBY neighborhood groups."

Bear in mind that the r/Austin crowd will accept nothing less than home values going down substantially (which would be potentially catastrophic for a number of reasons), the next best option is to have a mix of housing, including at prices affordable to the average family and/or rents that are affordable to those unable to afford a home.  At least for Austin proper, the reduction in minimum lot sizes and the parking lot minimum requirements are both steps towards that goal, and currently the council (and mayor) is enjoying the credit they probably don't fully deserve for rent stabilization due to the enormous amount of multi-family rental units that have come on the market over the last couple of years.  

Council is also the process of reviewing future land use maps, a ton of other acronyms in regards to land use, and attempting to use Cap Metro property for the purpose of making available more central affordable housing (affordable is such a fuzzy word I'm not sure it's helpful to keep using it).  Some of the most ardent opponents, btw, aren't silver haired, property rich District 9 homeowners, but working class renters concerned that their 25 unit apartment complex will be torn down for market rate apartments.  In other words, it's all a little messier than "let's just create the right conditions for building more density."

I'm not suggesting anyone start hanging a "Mission Accomplished" banner, but if you value these efforts I'm sure you'll find a friendly ear by reaching out to your CM and their staff.  

  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...