It’s almost like NYC already has a high population of billionaires despite its astronomically high cost of living.
It again comes down to the fact that people just have no earthly idea how much a billion dollars of net worth actually is. Invested conservatively with a 6% return that’s 60 million of sitting on your ass money per year. If NYC takes even 1% of that, that’s still 600,000 of additional taxable income and they would still keep 59,400,000 of income for doing nothing than investing their net worth.
It’s absurd this is even a debate to be having, and shows how effective generations of right wing messaging has had.
I think some of these pundits really believe billionaires are, like, just a little richer than millionaires like them, when in reality they are living like they’re an entirely different species.
As long as conservatives weirdos continue to be spectacularly bad at 99% of all art forms, they just aren’t going to replace New York as a place rich people want to be. Rich people love to spend money impressing each other. Just because they throw a tantrum when they have to put money toward making life better for non-rich people doesn’t mean they’ll stop wanting fancy things. 🙄
People like Faber don’t have a clue. They buy into the feeble protestations of billionaires when they are confronted with the slightest increase in taxes. What he, and many others, don’t understand is that those billionaires love their chic, New York lifestyle. They love their elegant condos and their fancy restaurants and their limo service and everything that comes with New York for the rich. They’re not gonna go off that. There’s nowhere else in America that has the cachet of New York and status is really important to them.
NYC needs a massive increase in housing—there’s just not nearly enough supply to meet the demand. But the stakeholders who own wouldn’t want that—it’d drive down rents and prices for what they own. So they put up all sorts of rules that make new construction less viable except for the most expensive building (parking minimums, square footage minimums, etc). So instead we have a small portion set aside for rent control which is lucky for those who get it (and they never want to let go of it) but lousy for anyone else. You wind up with NYers paying luxury rents for tiny bare-bones places.
I don’t know what would ever fix it so long as housing is under local political control. It’s a shame because it’s a city with potential to be so much more than it is.
I’m not sure it has ever worked! Once , the well off didn’t live in the city. They just commuted there and the working and middle class lived in the city with all the horse crap. (If The Great Gatsby were set today, the Buchanans would have a town house in the Upper East Side and Gatsby would have one on the Upper West Side)
Back in my home town in SC, the downtown core is mostly equidistant to the well off and the working class — they just commute from different directions. Many other places are like this and that is more sustainable than the New York or SF model.
I invite these affordability warriors to visit the places where upper middle class NY exiles have moved to escape NY housing prices. The Pioneer Valley (Western Mass generally), the Hudson Valley, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine. It’s like seeing the future.
Literally all of these places are having similar problems as New York City, except the gentrification is happening more rapidly because there’s just less infrastructure. Tons of demand for upper class amenities with no staff to work at these restaurants, salons, and bars. A society without a working class is very bleak. Vermont has quickly become too expensive for even college professors to own a home. My sister is a teacher in Massachusetts, makes $115,000/yr to work not near Boston, and still has to commute 40minutes to afford a house (her partner and her make $200,000+).
Every single desirable home has been hovered up by professional elites.
Yes, and AirBnBs so that the friends of the new residents have lush places to stay when they visit, while the roadsides are filled with dilapidated unused motels…
I remember sobbing on the subway platform listening to her concession speech in 2020, two days before the city shut down for good. She was my #1 choice and I’ll never not be mad.
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.
I bet she has to put special medicine in her eyes every morning to keep them from rolling right out of her head. This person was a professor, she knows how to handle dumb ass straw man whatabouts. Seriously, let's get those pearl clutching billionaires out of NYC and set up after school programs in their former real estate holdings. I bet they don't have lead in the plumbing fixtures.
Well Warren might be a leader till she gets Abrams Paradoxed again like she did the last time. I am fascinated how the New York CIty mayoral election has become nationalized. But I suppose if an Internet fave wins in a nominally blue city, maybe that is a path forward? Maybe all the scrambling and indecisiveness by others is because there have not been any major elections (for example the midterms) decided and everyone is trying to see what an *actual* victorious path would be. After all, Americans smashed Democrats into a tiny minority so we're going to see if the Newsom path or the Mamdani path will work.
Yeah it makes NO sense for them to be so hostile to Mamdani.
Mamdani has to prevail though and he *has* to do well in office or there's going to be a VERY big problem. I still think his biggest challenge will be when someone unhoused and/or mentally ill does something sensational on the subway, since a LOT of people are very into being cruel to such people. If he hits his response out of the park he's in like Flynn in my estimation.
All I can think of is he calls them out for it? Of course that opens up the rejoinder of "You're the boss! I guess you are weak!" and then there goes your political capital to do anything.
The other problem is that a lot of Americans (especially those with high amounts of political efficacy) have a reverence for police when they bust up people they don't like...such as the unhoused. And of course Black people (which is why there are Blue Line flags).
We are definitely cooked if counting on that; Democrats as a whole find it VERY difficult to unite (probably because there's so many different routes to how people become Democrats), and it's like pulling teeth to get everyone to row in the same direction. That's where I give the Republicans credit; they know how to remember the mission.
But who knows...Mamdani has the charisma and the equipment to inspire people to stick up for him, so maybe he can lead the way.
“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."
I voted for Liz Warren in the 2020 SC Democratic Primary, and still think that I made the right decision. She's still fighting for all Americans, but especially for the non-billionaire and non-millionaire Americans. Mamdani is fighting for the non-billionaire and non-millionaire New Yorkers. As for whining about the wealthy leaving, so be it, as Liz put it - they won't go hungry. I am sick and tired of wealthy folks whining about taxes and increased costs.
Also, thanks for pointing out that New York, and every other city, needs non-billionaires to run smoothly. The cities would probably still run without the billionaires, but not without the rest of the citizens. Call their bluff!
Liz is fantastic, my 2020 primary vote. People say she should have dropped out for Bernie but I think she might have had a chance if he would have endorsed her. Instead, he ran again and split the progs. And here we are.
To be fair, and speaking as a progressive, we split ourselves. I am no longer of the opinion that the Dems will field a winning candidate that is a woman. The first woman president will be a rethuglican.
I am absolutely ready to be proven wrong.
I love Warren, and she is the leader we needed- a policy wonk who knew the financial instuments that are strangling the republic.
Yeesh absolutely not. I wanted her policies 10 years ago. Since then she’s proven just as out of ideas as the GOP was in 2008, and once she knuckled under to activist bullying, she was never the same. That’s not leadership.
“OK Boomer” isn’t exactly the scathing indictment this guy seems to think it is. Pretty sure most would-be insult artists wore this one out about five years ago.
1. She was targeted by social justice activists in the 2016 cycle along with Bernie for some pretty infamous “podium stealing” incidents.
Now, that specific tactic of course has a long history like any other, but these incidents were a despicable misuse of the tactic. They served more to elevate the activists than their cause, and weakened the left overall in the face of suppression by the establishment.
To be clear, I’m not one of those people who say, “there’s a time and place for X tactic, and I will always complain that right here and now is not the right time or place”; rather, I’m saying, “the time and place one chooses for X tactic says more about them than their actual words”. The activists were not (then-)noble 1910s Bolsheviks cornering control of the movement so as to guide it to victory; they drove Warren/Sanders-ism into a ditch.
Ironically, THEY are the ones usually saying we should be judged not just by our noble intent but by the harms our actions cause. I’m applying that standard to the harms they caused to leftism.
2. Warren had good ideas for fixing the problems facing us back in 2008-2016. Excellent ones, even! After the 2016 cycle’s incidents, though, Warren basically only ever said what these activists wanted of her. By 2020, she was out of ideas and indistinguishable from the rest of the primary field.
3. Right now, her joint housing bill with Tim Scott is basically just one of those periodic efforts where an otherwise sclerotic and utterly diseased Congress loops back on some issue it’s been neglecting for obscenely long, in order to enact a bunch of stale, anodyne points of bored bipartisan agreement, just so everyone can crow about how they’re “doing something”. It’s a redux of Trump’s first-term criminal reform bill. There are no new ideas. This isn’t her “tax the billionaires” agenda from 10 years ago. And given her co-sponsor, it’s just more evidence that she’s lame and out of ideas.
4. None of this indicates a LICK of leadership ability. If she had it, she’d have usurped Schumer’s feeble ass a LONG time ago.
5. So, I refuse to give her a pass or a pat on the back just because she had a couple ideas I strongly agreed with 10 years ago that are now mostly moot amid an existential struggle for the future of the republic. This latest effort is a decade late and many trillions of dollars short. Like the rest of the gerontocracy that has utterly failed us, she needs to make way for a new generation.
Hey, thanks for the truckload of mansplaining! I don’t know how to navigate my day without a heapin’ helpin’ of it every morning. Also, good luck finding the perfect politician out there. Let us know when you find him, because it will definitely be a him, not a her.
@Stephen, I respect that you and I come from somewhat different perspectives, and have always appreciated yours, but I’m also not going to subject myself to the Karen Brigade. You’re welcome to ban me if you find my perspective a bridge too far for your community, but I’m just gonna block anyone besides yourself who only has attacks like this for me. Looks like I picked the wrong hornets nest to kick this morning. Admittedly, I didn’t get things off on the right foot and that’s my bad, but I’ve seen this rodeo before in other venues.
The funny part is I still support Mamdani, for reasons related to much what I outlined here.
It’s almost like NYC already has a high population of billionaires despite its astronomically high cost of living.
It again comes down to the fact that people just have no earthly idea how much a billion dollars of net worth actually is. Invested conservatively with a 6% return that’s 60 million of sitting on your ass money per year. If NYC takes even 1% of that, that’s still 600,000 of additional taxable income and they would still keep 59,400,000 of income for doing nothing than investing their net worth.
It’s absurd this is even a debate to be having, and shows how effective generations of right wing messaging has had.
I think some of these pundits really believe billionaires are, like, just a little richer than millionaires like them, when in reality they are living like they’re an entirely different species.
As long as conservatives weirdos continue to be spectacularly bad at 99% of all art forms, they just aren’t going to replace New York as a place rich people want to be. Rich people love to spend money impressing each other. Just because they throw a tantrum when they have to put money toward making life better for non-rich people doesn’t mean they’ll stop wanting fancy things. 🙄
People like Faber don’t have a clue. They buy into the feeble protestations of billionaires when they are confronted with the slightest increase in taxes. What he, and many others, don’t understand is that those billionaires love their chic, New York lifestyle. They love their elegant condos and their fancy restaurants and their limo service and everything that comes with New York for the rich. They’re not gonna go off that. There’s nowhere else in America that has the cachet of New York and status is really important to them.
NYC needs a massive increase in housing—there’s just not nearly enough supply to meet the demand. But the stakeholders who own wouldn’t want that—it’d drive down rents and prices for what they own. So they put up all sorts of rules that make new construction less viable except for the most expensive building (parking minimums, square footage minimums, etc). So instead we have a small portion set aside for rent control which is lucky for those who get it (and they never want to let go of it) but lousy for anyone else. You wind up with NYers paying luxury rents for tiny bare-bones places.
I don’t know what would ever fix it so long as housing is under local political control. It’s a shame because it’s a city with potential to be so much more than it is.
I’m not sure it has ever worked! Once , the well off didn’t live in the city. They just commuted there and the working and middle class lived in the city with all the horse crap. (If The Great Gatsby were set today, the Buchanans would have a town house in the Upper East Side and Gatsby would have one on the Upper West Side)
Back in my home town in SC, the downtown core is mostly equidistant to the well off and the working class — they just commute from different directions. Many other places are like this and that is more sustainable than the New York or SF model.
I invite these affordability warriors to visit the places where upper middle class NY exiles have moved to escape NY housing prices. The Pioneer Valley (Western Mass generally), the Hudson Valley, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine. It’s like seeing the future.
Literally all of these places are having similar problems as New York City, except the gentrification is happening more rapidly because there’s just less infrastructure. Tons of demand for upper class amenities with no staff to work at these restaurants, salons, and bars. A society without a working class is very bleak. Vermont has quickly become too expensive for even college professors to own a home. My sister is a teacher in Massachusetts, makes $115,000/yr to work not near Boston, and still has to commute 40minutes to afford a house (her partner and her make $200,000+).
Every single desirable home has been hovered up by professional elites.
And airbnbs
Yes, and AirBnBs so that the friends of the new residents have lush places to stay when they visit, while the roadsides are filled with dilapidated unused motels…
I remember sobbing on the subway platform listening to her concession speech in 2020, two days before the city shut down for good. She was my #1 choice and I’ll never not be mad.
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.
Hell YEAH SENATOR WARREN!!!!!
I bet she has to put special medicine in her eyes every morning to keep them from rolling right out of her head. This person was a professor, she knows how to handle dumb ass straw man whatabouts. Seriously, let's get those pearl clutching billionaires out of NYC and set up after school programs in their former real estate holdings. I bet they don't have lead in the plumbing fixtures.
Well Warren might be a leader till she gets Abrams Paradoxed again like she did the last time. I am fascinated how the New York CIty mayoral election has become nationalized. But I suppose if an Internet fave wins in a nominally blue city, maybe that is a path forward? Maybe all the scrambling and indecisiveness by others is because there have not been any major elections (for example the midterms) decided and everyone is trying to see what an *actual* victorious path would be. After all, Americans smashed Democrats into a tiny minority so we're going to see if the Newsom path or the Mamdani path will work.
Honestly I am HOPPING MAD at the b.s. the leadership has shown over the winner of the NYC mayoral primary. Their true color isn't blue, it's yellow.
Cowards.
Yeah it makes NO sense for them to be so hostile to Mamdani.
Mamdani has to prevail though and he *has* to do well in office or there's going to be a VERY big problem. I still think his biggest challenge will be when someone unhoused and/or mentally ill does something sensational on the subway, since a LOT of people are very into being cruel to such people. If he hits his response out of the park he's in like Flynn in my estimation.
This is the problem every time. There is little he can do about it. We know the cops will essentially stop working once he gets into office.
I wish I knew the answer to that
All I can think of is he calls them out for it? Of course that opens up the rejoinder of "You're the boss! I guess you are weak!" and then there goes your political capital to do anything.
The other problem is that a lot of Americans (especially those with high amounts of political efficacy) have a reverence for police when they bust up people they don't like...such as the unhoused. And of course Black people (which is why there are Blue Line flags).
Yeah it’s unite or die time. The people have to stand, and stand together, or this is it.
We are definitely cooked if counting on that; Democrats as a whole find it VERY difficult to unite (probably because there's so many different routes to how people become Democrats), and it's like pulling teeth to get everyone to row in the same direction. That's where I give the Republicans credit; they know how to remember the mission.
But who knows...Mamdani has the charisma and the equipment to inspire people to stick up for him, so maybe he can lead the way.
“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."
I voted for Liz Warren in the 2020 SC Democratic Primary, and still think that I made the right decision. She's still fighting for all Americans, but especially for the non-billionaire and non-millionaire Americans. Mamdani is fighting for the non-billionaire and non-millionaire New Yorkers. As for whining about the wealthy leaving, so be it, as Liz put it - they won't go hungry. I am sick and tired of wealthy folks whining about taxes and increased costs.
Also, thanks for pointing out that New York, and every other city, needs non-billionaires to run smoothly. The cities would probably still run without the billionaires, but not without the rest of the citizens. Call their bluff!
Hard same. She keeps proving that she’s the real thing.
I voted for her as well. Not sorry that I did.
My President!
Amen.
Liz is fantastic, my 2020 primary vote. People say she should have dropped out for Bernie but I think she might have had a chance if he would have endorsed her. Instead, he ran again and split the progs. And here we are.
To be fair, and speaking as a progressive, we split ourselves. I am no longer of the opinion that the Dems will field a winning candidate that is a woman. The first woman president will be a rethuglican.
I am absolutely ready to be proven wrong.
I love Warren, and she is the leader we needed- a policy wonk who knew the financial instuments that are strangling the republic.
Yeesh absolutely not. I wanted her policies 10 years ago. Since then she’s proven just as out of ideas as the GOP was in 2008, and once she knuckled under to activist bullying, she was never the same. That’s not leadership.
What are you talking about?
OK Boomer. If you can’t decipher a pretty obvious paragraph, then I can’t help you.
"I am not here to engage, I'm here to stink up the room!"
Mission accomplished DM!
How are you settling into your gen-x bifocals? Can you read the labels on your still-in-the-packaging Star Wars Episode 1 toys now?
OUCH!
(:
LOL! I’ve been OK Boomered!
BTW, what’s obvious to some, is not to others. More info or an explanation helps, but if the original poster refuses to explain, they got nothing.
“OK Boomer” isn’t exactly the scathing indictment this guy seems to think it is. Pretty sure most would-be insult artists wore this one out about five years ago.
1. She was targeted by social justice activists in the 2016 cycle along with Bernie for some pretty infamous “podium stealing” incidents.
Now, that specific tactic of course has a long history like any other, but these incidents were a despicable misuse of the tactic. They served more to elevate the activists than their cause, and weakened the left overall in the face of suppression by the establishment.
To be clear, I’m not one of those people who say, “there’s a time and place for X tactic, and I will always complain that right here and now is not the right time or place”; rather, I’m saying, “the time and place one chooses for X tactic says more about them than their actual words”. The activists were not (then-)noble 1910s Bolsheviks cornering control of the movement so as to guide it to victory; they drove Warren/Sanders-ism into a ditch.
Ironically, THEY are the ones usually saying we should be judged not just by our noble intent but by the harms our actions cause. I’m applying that standard to the harms they caused to leftism.
2. Warren had good ideas for fixing the problems facing us back in 2008-2016. Excellent ones, even! After the 2016 cycle’s incidents, though, Warren basically only ever said what these activists wanted of her. By 2020, she was out of ideas and indistinguishable from the rest of the primary field.
3. Right now, her joint housing bill with Tim Scott is basically just one of those periodic efforts where an otherwise sclerotic and utterly diseased Congress loops back on some issue it’s been neglecting for obscenely long, in order to enact a bunch of stale, anodyne points of bored bipartisan agreement, just so everyone can crow about how they’re “doing something”. It’s a redux of Trump’s first-term criminal reform bill. There are no new ideas. This isn’t her “tax the billionaires” agenda from 10 years ago. And given her co-sponsor, it’s just more evidence that she’s lame and out of ideas.
4. None of this indicates a LICK of leadership ability. If she had it, she’d have usurped Schumer’s feeble ass a LONG time ago.
5. So, I refuse to give her a pass or a pat on the back just because she had a couple ideas I strongly agreed with 10 years ago that are now mostly moot amid an existential struggle for the future of the republic. This latest effort is a decade late and many trillions of dollars short. Like the rest of the gerontocracy that has utterly failed us, she needs to make way for a new generation.
Hey, thanks for the truckload of mansplaining! I don’t know how to navigate my day without a heapin’ helpin’ of it every morning. Also, good luck finding the perfect politician out there. Let us know when you find him, because it will definitely be a him, not a her.
Oh JFC.
@Stephen, I respect that you and I come from somewhat different perspectives, and have always appreciated yours, but I’m also not going to subject myself to the Karen Brigade. You’re welcome to ban me if you find my perspective a bridge too far for your community, but I’m just gonna block anyone besides yourself who only has attacks like this for me. Looks like I picked the wrong hornets nest to kick this morning. Admittedly, I didn’t get things off on the right foot and that’s my bad, but I’ve seen this rodeo before in other venues.
The funny part is I still support Mamdani, for reasons related to much what I outlined here.
Have fun riding your purity pony into the abyss
That made no sense whatsoever given the context.