get fucked, centrists
gasp
Where’s your tolerance?! I thought progressives were nice!
no, i’m an angry progressive. think we should bring back the bull moose party and find a socialist that can gish gallop the way Trump does
Tolerance doesn’t mean someone can’t be mean to you. It means they give you the same rights they expect you to give them.
This includes the right to say “get fucked” to others and to disassociate from people that are likely to say “get fucked” to you.
Listen sweaty, Martin Luther King didn’t create the underground railroad by telling people to get fucked, okay? He was all about nonviolence AKA, ya know being nice to people?? Preeeettttyyy suuuure I know what I’m talking about here.
spoiler
Please, dear readers, don’t make me submit to the
/sdegradation, I’ll do it like this instead lolAnyone who thinks you’re being earnest here is beyond hope lol
I think you’re right, I’m sometimes more subtle than I mean to be but not this time lol
Some of us are just doing all we can to avoid spilling blood.
You can’t win office without Independent votes.
Anyone that you want to elect must get Independent votes, they are 40% of the voters (Ds & Rs 30% each).
When I need help, I don’t tell the potential aid to fuck off, but what do I know? Let’s see how “fuck off” inspires the electorate.
Centrist doesn’t like hearing the messaging that centrists have been sending the left for 40 years.
Look, I know that a candidate who isn’t itching to murder every last Palestinian might not be your very first choice, but they agree with you on 98% of everything else, right? So vote blue no matter who.
This assumes independents are centrists…
I love how the wing of the party that expected us to accept that “starting the process of rescheduling cannabis” is the same thing as “rescheduling cannabis” suddenly has all these ideas about how “balancing the budget” isn’t “balancing the budget.”
The wonders of taxing the rich.
TBF, from the analysis someone else posted, taxing the rich only brought in, like, 550 mil. Which isn’t nothing, but it’s not like “tax the rich” saved the city - they did a lot of other stuff.
Although true, I think that undersells the effect of even this minor tax on the rich. Every dollar out of a rich person pocket is a dollar out of asset investments portfolios and another dollar in the local economy. Until housing isn’t a viable investment vehicle, as an example, that’s another dollar not going to increasing the cost of housing. Housing getting cheaper means cost of living goes down not just for the worker but for the stores that sell you your food and your stuff, which has a knock on effect of making cost of living even cheaper.
Taxing the rich, even a small additional percentage, isn’t just about raising more money it’s about redistributing it from the people who use it in the worst ways possible (corrupting systems, amassing power, buying the world) to the people who use it in the best way possible (paying for food, housing, education, healthcare, hobbies, art, and their communities).
We should tax multi-millionaires out of existence, but any additional tax against the systemic problem of wealth inequality is a win in my book.
They got bailed out by the state, along with delayed pensions, and shifting financial burdens from the city to the state that had been previously moved under Governor Cuomo.
The largest share — about $2.3 billion over two years — is expected to come from the city’s delaying certain pension payments, a change that requires state approval and buy-in from municipal unions.
…
To balance this year’s budget, Mr. Mamdani is proposing to delay payments into New York City’s pension funds.
The city has five pension funds representing teachers, police officers, firefighters and other unionized municipal workers. The returns, which are invested, total about $300 billion.
The mayor’s plan, which would save $2.3 billion through the end of the upcoming fiscal year, would involve restructuring the city’s contributions to the funds following an overhaul instituted in 2013 by Bill de Blasio, then the mayor of New York City, and Andrew M. Cuomo, then the governor. At that time, the mayor changed the city’s pension payment obligations following a drop in the assumed rate of return, to 7 percent from 8 percent.
(and fucking, of course: “Police officers’ pensions would be unaffected by the proposed change, as their union, the Police Benevolent Association, is opposed to the plan.”)
https://archive.ph/XARnw (NY Times)
So, it sounds like the biggest contribution to the balanced budget is to push problems down the road and delay funding pensions. To a certain extent I get it. He was left with a time bomb that was about to go off, and if he can balance the budget (even if it’s by delaying pension payments) he can defuse that time bomb and get some breathing room. I would hope that the unions accept the pension delay because I think having him as mayor is going to pay off for them in the long term.
It’s clear that this budget isn’t really balanced, at least not long term. It sounds like he’s still going to have to make some hard decisions, either cutting benefits or raising revenues. It sounds like one item that needs addressing is the cost per student in NYC which is twice as high as other places. That’s going to involve making some hard decisions and taking on some powerful special interests.
And of course, if he can actually fix NYC’s biggest problem (the NYPD) he’ll go a long way to solving the other probems.
That’s the biggest individual contribution, but it was only about 20% of the deficit. The other 80% was actually solved, as far as I can tell.
A huge chunk of it was state spending, or the state agreeing not to force the city to meet state mandates:
Earlier this year, Ms. Hochul committed $1.5 billion in state aid for a host of municipal services. The state budget, which has not yet been finalized, is also expected to include a host of policy changes and revenue increases that will funnel another $4 billion to the city over the next two years.
…
The city is expected to save another $1 billion over two years from several changes, including the state’s expected agreement to delay a class-size mandate in public schools (despite Mr. Mamdani’s support for the mandate as a candidate); more school aid from the state; and the assumption by the state of a larger share of death benefits for families of police officers, firefighters and emergency medical workers.
That’s happening because “Ms. Hochul, … is facing re-election this year, [and] needs Mr. Mamdani’s help in turning out Democratic voters in New York City.” After she’s securely in office for another 4 year term, who knows how willing she’ll be to do those same deals.
If Mandami remains popular, maybe he can keep the governor on his side. It would be ideal if they solved some of these problems as a team instead of working against each-other. I’m hopeful. Right now people seem to be in a very anti-status-quo mood. Mandami is showing how Democratic Socialism is a different way of doing things from the status quo. If he appears to be succeeding, more people will want to work with him. If more people can work with him, he can maybe take on some of the really big challenges that require a lot of people working together. At that point, it’s not just a budget that appears to be balanced if you shift the pension burdens into the future. It may actually be a budget that will really work in the long term.
That’s happening because “Ms. Hochul, … is facing re-election this year, [and] needs Mr. Mamdani’s help in turning out Democratic voters in New York City.” After she’s securely in office for another 4 year term, who knows how willing she’ll be to do those same deals.
If he delivers NYC, then he owns her, and she’ll have to come through with the favors.
Or what? There’s no election for years.
What? There’s an election every year, especially in cities and states. There will be an election 2027, too.
Only if she thinks he’ll still be in power next time she faces election.
She’ll be looking for some kind of job in government, and she’s not going to want to be the guy that was pushing back against Mamdani’s success, especially after his successes start to look like future Democratic policies.
Remember how none of those Dem pricks backed him for mayor, even against a door like Sliwa? Then when he gets elected, and has his Inauguration, they all show up to that party, and pretended like they were behind him all along?
He’s starting to look like the future of the Democrat Party, and she better get on board, or get left behind. She knows what’s up, she’ll be riding his coattails.
No one gets elected for having a well reasoned plan to actually bring down a budget deficit these days in the long term. The voter can’t or won’t accept that fixing something that took years to create will take years to get out of. And admitting that is electoral suicide.
All debt is “kicking the can down the road” in some way, having a plan for it seems better than not though.
Except with most debt you’re making incremental payments toward it. This is skipping one of your scheduled payments and then claiming that your budget is balanced.
But… it is?
Budgeting is a cash flow management tool. Deferring payment is a cash flow positive action.
Besides the budget you also have a balance sheet, where debt is a liability, that is separately balanced against assets. It’s not very clear what that means for governments though, if debts exceed assets, who will reclaim a government?
In a couple months? Would be curious to see how, anyone have a ELI5 sheet of the changes made?
They taxed rich people and kept congestion pricing pretty much.
A big slug of money from the state was the real budget closer.
Right. In exchange for taxing second homes in NYC
“The poor get all the breaks! It isn’t fair!”
Right, taxing second homes worth $5 million or more. Are we supposed to feel sorry about rich people who can afford a SECOND home that’s over $5 million, when they are asked to pay a tiny bit extra?
Those wealthy parasites would let everybody in NYC literally starve to death before they would pay an extra nickel. Fuck anyone who believes that, we should confiscate EVERYTHING from them, and throw them in prison.
Gift article from the NY times explaining.
But influx from the state, taxes on second homes, deferred payments to pension programs, and a host of compromises. He in no way raised $12Bn in new revenue through taxes to cover the deficit.
They also got rid of state financial obligations that Cuomo had stuck on the city, and cleaned up corruption from past administrations. Those were significant savings, too.
The point is that governments can be substantially improved with even a little actual reform and not duplicitous reform like DOGE. We can have change, it just takes voting in responsible, ethical government managers, not carnival barkers.
DOGE wasn’t “reform,” it was sabotage
That’s what they are saying. It was duplicitous. It presented itself as reform but was not.
Which would be why they called it duplicitous
Listen all of y’all it’s a sab-a-DOGE!
Deferred payments usually costs more in the end.
deferred payments to pension programs
Oof, not too sure about this one…
The original video talks about it: https://xcancel.com/NYCMayor/status/2054255351340421585#m
Most of the $12 billion was a bailout from the state according to the video.
How is it a ‘bail out’ when NYC is the engine of the entire state and receives far less money per capita than other parts of the state do?
The article linked above seems to roughly agree:
- $6.5B state aid + school funding / life insurance payout shifts to state responsibility
- $2.8B from the city via delayed pensions + taxes on second homes valued >$5M
Earlier this year, Ms. Hochul committed $1.5 billion in state aid for a host of municipal services. The state budget, which has not yet been finalized, is also expected to include a host of policy changes and revenue increases that will funnel another $4 billion to the city over the next two years.
The largest share — about $2.3 billion over two years — is expected to come from the city’s delaying certain pension payments, a change that requires state approval and buy-in from municipal unions.
The mayor and governor also expect another half-billion dollars to flow from the new tax surcharge on second homes worth more than $5 million that Ms. Hochul recently announced. But the city comptroller recently argued that number might be overly optimistic, and New York City’s byzantine property valuation system means that the new tax would come with substantial implementation challenges.
The city is expected to save another $1 billion over two years from several changes, including the state’s expected agreement to delay a class-size mandate in public schools (despite Mr. Mamdani’s support for the mandate as a candidate); more school aid from the state; and the assumption by the state of a larger share of death benefits for families of police officers, firefighters and emergency medical workers.
I bet most of the pension changes are probably for NYPD members.
The NYPD pension provides retirement benefits based on years of service, salary history, and plan type, with average full-career retiree pensions exceeding $100,000 annually
Holy fuck
They get a over $100k USD pension, wtf.
Well, they need that to stop them being corrupt.
I mean, it hasn’t worked so far, but it might.
That should be a normal thing not a crazy thing.
maybe he convinced NY that they’re basically nothing without NYC?
Come on man, Buffalo is standing right there!
Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
This type of governing has been possible the whole time which is the worst part. Keep up the good work Mamdani and his team.
Who would have thought taxing the rich improves everyone’s lives?
Nah, they just got lucky. We absolutely cannot keep trying this, because it’s doomed to fail. Capitalism is the only system that works.
I say let’s try it elsewhere, just to prove those despicable commies it was absolutely a fluke.
This is capitalism though, like, fully and throughout.
If we tax the rich they will all move away to other countries then we will be left here with just the people who do all the work. We will never survive
No need to seize the means of production if they simply abandon it…
But he did it by not adding more money to your pension programs. The tax the rich part only made about 5% on the gap
You mean city employee pensions. That is roughly 750,000 people. Id rather the pension lose city contributions than multiple programs that effect the average NYC tax payer.
Leftist critique (not attempting to shit on Mamdani, just food for thought):
“Balancing the budget” on public finances is right wing propaganda. The public sector literally creates an indefinitely big amount of dollars, and fighting for “balancing the budget” implies restricting expenditure arbitrarily. This expenditure could fund welfare policy, improved social services, public housing, infrastructure…
The public sector isn’t (or rather shouldn’t be in practice) restricted by funding constraints, and any attempt to say otherwise is neoliberal propaganda designed to justify budget cuts to welfare.
Local government isn’t a currency issuer though. Sure a city can issue bonds but that’s real debt, just like household debt.
Currency issuing governments, well yeah that’s another story.
Notice how I didn’t say local government. I specifically said not to criticise Mamdani because it’s not his fault, but he could and should be doing MMT propaganda explaining these concepts and showing how absurd it is that we make the political decision of giving this arbitrary limit to public spending at the local level.
I more or less agree with your point. But it’s hardly fair to make a comment in a thread about a specific topic then get upset if people discuss it in the context of that topic.
The public sector should be constrainted by funding and that funding should be remediated via taxes.
Money isn’t supposed to be infinate. The system as is requires uncapped spending.
The public sector should be constrainted by funding
No, it shouldn’t. Governments can literally create any amounts of money. At times, the correct economic policy is to have more deficit, at times the correct economic policy is to have less deficit, and being arbitrarily bounded by artificial balance budgets (which don’t apply to entities capable of issuing their own currency) implies unnecessary suffering for many.
You didn’t argue anything from knowledge, you just proudly stated your uneducated opinion on the topic.
Money isn’t supposed to be infinate. The system as is requires uncapped spending
This doesn’t even make sense, you’re contradicting yourself, finite money and uncapped spending are literally impossible to have together. Are you an AI?
Just make more money! Who would have thought of that? Your educated opinion is quite impressive.
p.s. the US government doesn’t issue their own currency, that’s the Fed.
Just make more money! Who would have thought of that?
Modern Monetary Theory economists. Randall Wray, Alberto Garzón, Stephanie Kelton. John Maynard Keynes… Apparently it’s such a radical thought that fools like you without economic training whatsoever can’t even conceive it, and it takes scholars with decades of study of macroeconomics to realize that the limits to public spending shouldn’t be arbitrary and should be dictated by macroeconomic needs and policy
And Dems fought him at every turn.
and repubs. only the proplr sided with him and that was enough
It’s amazing what can happen when the establishment fails to block candidates who actually want to fix things.
Delaying pensions= he didn’t balance the budget.
He’s deferring it for others to balance in the future.
Impressive achievement for the mooks, but the same old shit, really.
He took a $12.4b deficit that Adams had deferred to him and deferred $2.3b, solving the rest.
As you said… NYC is $2.3 billion in the red. So, it’s not really balanced, as I said.
He’s been in office for under five months. Solving 80% of the deficit is a pretty damn good start, and if he has to kick the other 20% down the road, so be it.
And tbf, “deferring it for others to balance in the future” maybe, or maybe he does it later in this term, or gets reelected, and so he’s bought himself time to balance that bit instead of “others.”
While that comment may be right that it technically isn’t balanced, it’s certainly an improvement and there’s no guarantee he won’t be able to finish that bit at a later date himself, and so far he didn’t even raise taxes, which I’ll be honest is impressive, even if you happened to disagree with any of his other politics you can’t hate that.
Eh, better than defering the 100% that Adams had defered to him, or even more. He’s, in principleM only deferring 20%… that’s a huge decrease…
“The pension gimmick balances this budget on the backs of future New Yorkers — making residents in the mid-2030s pay for closing the fiscal year 2027 budget gap,” the organization said in a statement.
Which organization. Source?
A quick Internet search for that phrase gives me: https://cbcny.org/advocacy/statement-new-york-city-fiscal-year-2027-executive-budget but I haven’t verified or vetted that source.
Well it’s still a balanced budget.
“Balanced” by getting one time money from the state and shorting the city pension fund.
![GIF Willy Wonka "stop. Don't. Come back." [sarcasm]](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/136f0c0a-58d8-40bc-b661-2e75e7bf82ec.gif)
