All that money should belong to me
(Hello and welcome to BartCop
readers: hopefully you find something interesting on the right-hand
column. I am not quite the wingnut that I might seem to be, despite my
deep dislike towards many leftist pet issues. But I intend to later
write more about the effect that BartCop had on me during my undergrad
years.)
To slightly continue the topic of the previous posting, perhaps it would be interesting to visit Las Vegas at least once, especially since BartCop has always been so enthusiastic about that town. Maybe we should have gone there on our tenth wedding anniversary last summer, but there's still time, unless Kunstler is right in his dire predictions of peak oil and the diminishing Vegas water supply. We could enjoy the overall tackiness and overwhelming buffets without carrying a giant bankroll, I guess.
I have to wonder about the accidents of history that made Las Vegas possible in the first place and go on to become the place that it is today. Surely the scorching heat and lack of water are not beneficial to Vegas, so I wonder what the town would be like if it had been built in some place where human life and some honestly productive industry and argiculture are possible. I mean, if you could freely pick a place where you want to build a center of tourism, gambling and entertainment, would you really choose a piece of hostile desert in the middle of nowhere? Wouldn't, say, perhaps some beautiful and pleasant wine valley in California have been a far more suitable location to build such a place? Of course, to anyone with a bit of common sense.
But that's how it was going to be, when that one place in effect received (and in many ways, still keeps receiving) a massive hidden subsidy for essentially being the only place where gambling is legal.It's almost like the governments of other states had granted Las Vegas a license to print money. The whole place is therefore a perfect example of government planning gone wrong. Don't mean that we shouldn't enjoy the results now that they are there, though.
To slightly continue the topic of the previous posting, perhaps it would be interesting to visit Las Vegas at least once, especially since BartCop has always been so enthusiastic about that town. Maybe we should have gone there on our tenth wedding anniversary last summer, but there's still time, unless Kunstler is right in his dire predictions of peak oil and the diminishing Vegas water supply. We could enjoy the overall tackiness and overwhelming buffets without carrying a giant bankroll, I guess.
I have to wonder about the accidents of history that made Las Vegas possible in the first place and go on to become the place that it is today. Surely the scorching heat and lack of water are not beneficial to Vegas, so I wonder what the town would be like if it had been built in some place where human life and some honestly productive industry and argiculture are possible. I mean, if you could freely pick a place where you want to build a center of tourism, gambling and entertainment, would you really choose a piece of hostile desert in the middle of nowhere? Wouldn't, say, perhaps some beautiful and pleasant wine valley in California have been a far more suitable location to build such a place? Of course, to anyone with a bit of common sense.
But that's how it was going to be, when that one place in effect received (and in many ways, still keeps receiving) a massive hidden subsidy for essentially being the only place where gambling is legal.It's almost like the governments of other states had granted Las Vegas a license to print money. The whole place is therefore a perfect example of government planning gone wrong. Don't mean that we shouldn't enjoy the results now that they are there, though.
Comments