Liz Warren Is The Surrogate Zohran Mamdani Deserves And The Party Leader Democrats Need
Here's how it's done.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren from Massachusetts has fully endorsed and is openly campaigning for New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani. It’s a shameful contrast to New York Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, as well as New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker. Mamdani fairly won the Democratic primary, but these Democrats have ignored their phony “vote blue no matter who” principle, even if the alternatives on the ballot include a Republican, a sex pest, and a sitting mayor indicted for corruption.
Warren has done a masterful job communicating how Mamdani’s campaign reflects the Democratic Party’s ideals and values, rather than accepting right-wing talking points about the popular candidate who freaks out their donors. Shortly after Mamdani’s primary victory, Warren appeared on CNBC’s Squawk Box and shut down host Joe Kernen’s assertion that Mamdani represents some drastic shift to the far-left. (Watch below.)
“You misunderstand what his campaign was about,” Warren said. “His campaign was saying, ‘I want to invest in NYC. I want to invest in people being able to have good jobs here, put their kids in school and build housing.’ And he built a grassroots campaign. He didn’t have a billionaire who came in and funded him. He didn’t say I’m going to make this a great place for billionaires to live.”
It’s not that hard to link Mamdani’s policies to those the Democratic Party claims to support, especially as Republicans pass legislation that guts the working class. Warren is serving as the leader that Chuck Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries refuse to be, perhaps because Warren has no billionaire strings attached to her.
Last Monday, Warren appeared on CNBC’s Squawk on the Street, where she endured some weapons-grade mansplaining from host Dan Faber, who lectured her about how Mamdani’s policies would drive away wealthy New Yorkers who react to slightly higher taxes like Dracula to a cross. (Watch below.)
“New York does not operate in a vacuum,” Faber said. “It competes with other cities. And so this idea of somehow raising taxes on the wealthiest New Yorkers, who, by the way, would point out pay roughly 15 percent of their income right now between city and state. Raising taxes on them will simply drive them away.”
“Shouldn’t the focus of a mayor be on delivering services to the constituents of the city and doing that by raising the most revenue as possible without chasing businesses and the high-income taxpayers out of the city?” he continued. “Because they can go to Austin. They can go to Dallas. They can go to Atlanta. They can go to Nashville. This is your issue. It’s a national issue, not a local issue.”
Andrew Cuomo and other Mamdani opponents have raised the horrifying prospect that wealthy, status-conscious New Yorkers will leave New York en masse for sloppy seconds cities where they can eventually see the touring productions of popular Broadway shows.
What’s interesting is that former Mayor Mike Bloomberg once boasted that New York City was a “luxury” good more than worth the rising price.
“If New York City is a business, it isn’t Wal-Mart — it isn’t trying to be the lowest-priced product in the market,” Bloomberg said in 2003. “It’s a high-end product, maybe even a luxury product. New York offers tremendous value, but only for those companies able to capitalize on it.”
Bloomberg argued that “higher crime, and a lack of city services would drive businesses out of the city faster than higher costs.” His remarks were apparently well-received from the executives in the audience, but Bloomberg speaks fluent billionaire.
What threatens the viability of New York isn’t high taxes for the city’s 66 billionaire residents. It’s an overall affordability crisis for the working-class New Yorkers who make the city function. They’re the ones leaving the city at a significant rate. According to research by the Fiscal Policy Institute, the people most likely to leave New York City right now are Black and Hispanic residents, households with young children, and low-to-middle income families. The average working-class New Yorker is reportedly four times more likely to move than the top 1 percent of earners.
The people who run the subway, make the breakfast sandwiches, mix the cocktails and do everything the wealthy need to survive are being driven out of the city daily due to the high cost of living (especially rent). This is happening in cities across the country, and the mainstream media response is to shrug or say, “Enjoy that commute from Tacoma to Seattle.”
Many of these people stay in the cities where they grew up, despite the worsening circumstances, because they have a deep affection for their communities and their families. Meanwhile, the wealthy are depicted as fairweather residents, who will pack up and leave if they are moderately inconvenienced. “I love New York but will move to Nashville and increase its housing prices if my taxes are raised slightly to improve the city for everyone.” That doesn’t look great on a t-shirt.
No one has blamed past New York mayors, such as Bloomberg, for the working people who were forced out of New York during their tenure as mayor. (Ironically, many of my artist friends from New York landed in Portland and Seattle 20 or so years ago and are now facing a similar predicament.)
Warren told Faber (and everyone watching) that Zohran Mamdani isn’t some scary socialist bogeyman. “What Zohran is saying is ‘I want people to be able to afford to live in New York City!” she said, and Faber responded, aghast, “But raising taxes in order to do it?”
“Oh dear, are you worried that billionaires are going to go hungry?” Warren replied.
“No, I’m worried that they’re going to leave and spend their money elsewhere!” Faber whined.
Warren was unmoved, pointing out that billionaires always threaten this when faced with a marginal increase in their tax rate. She stressed that New Yorker’s next mayor should focus on the 8 million other non-billionaires in the city. They are the ones who are actively fleeing. The New Yorkers who talk about where they “sourced” the coffee table in their palatial living rooms aren’t going anywhere. That’s an empty bluff.
Besides, a hedge fund executive can’t make a damn bacon, egg, cheese, salt, pepper, ketchup on a kaiser roll. New York needs the folks working the corner bodega. That’s whose interests Mamdani prioritizes, and it will make the city more livable for everyone.
“Oh dear, are you worried that billionaires are going to go hungry?” is the best comeback ever.
I don't know; I do not personally know any billionaires nor do I live in New York City. However, I don't think an increase in their taxes would be enough to make any of them abandon the city. Hell, their lifestyles won't have to change and they likely won't even notice it. I think they'd stay because there's something very cool about NYC, so cosmopolitan. I think they'd rather say they live in NYC than, say, Nashville or even Miami. And, what the hell, they can smugly tell other billionaires who live elsewhere, "I'm helping the poors."
Love how Warren does not let anyone roll over her. Affordability in larger cities is a huge problem. Let’s say you have 100 underpaid people and 10 billionaires. Guess who has no choice but to leave because they get priced out? It sure as hell ain’t the billionaires.
Even with high end properties and mega yachts it’s very difficult to burn through billions of dollars.