WSJ headline:

“Mayor Mamdani Meets With JPMorgan’s Dimon
The New York City mayor was also scheduled to meet with Goldman Sachs’s David Solomon on Monday“

https://www.wsj.com/finance/mayor-mamdan...9a?mod=mhp

Unsurprisingly except to Dem’s, NYC’s wealthy are unhappy with being skinned under Mamdani’s “tax the rich” scheme and with the doxxing and demonization of Ken Griffin. Mamdani is discovering these people have options other than NYC for both their personal and professional pursuits.

They hold Mamdani’s fate in their hand.

Now Mamdani is forced to meet with the very people he has targeted and play nice.

Maybe they can explain basic economics to him.

My guess is he will say the right things to their face then say the opposite to the public…. And then he will get burned.

You can’t fix stupid

Socialism is impossible to implement on a state level. Full stop. On a city level it’s just moronic to try.

This is what they should point out to him. When people can simply move to avoid massive tax increases, you can’t count on any revenue from tax increases.

(05-18-2026 10:28 PM)450bench Wrote:  You can’t fix stupid

Beat me to it. He was elected at age 33, and his only prior job was failed rapper. What could possibly go wrong?

He needs to learn to trim the budget big time, and operate within it. His freaking budget is larger than the state of Florida's, with 1/3 the population. That's insane.

The basic truth is cities and states must live within their means because they cannot print money like the Feds. Bond agencies do not care how they do it (eg, increase taxes, improve efficiencies, and cut services) assuming it is sustainable.

NYC has mainly chosen the increased taxes route. The problem for them is revenue is not stagnant. It might decline. For example, the economy might sour and harm Wall Street and productive people will tend to flee to somewhere else with better services and lower taxes.

I am an anecdotal proof of concept. I moved from Nashville to a small city in East Tennessee. Although I pay only 3/4th the taxes of Nashville; the public schools are among the best in Tennessee, garbage pick up is reliable, junk and vegetation pickup is included, the parks and greenways are on par with Nashville, the streets are smoother, side walks more available, the public pools cleaner and well supervised, crime is much lower, fire responses quick and effective, ect. Furthermore, my new adobe does not tolerate vagrancy, public use of drugs, illegal demonstrations, and illegal acts like drag shows for kids (the police chief said the owner would be arrested and the owner wisely decided to follow the law).

In sum, I receive better services and a better quality of life at significantly less cost. What is the difference? The primary reason is Nashville voters elect Dems' and my area elects Republicans and holds them accountable.

(05-19-2026 07:16 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  The basic truth is cities and states must live within their means because they cannot print money like the Feds. Bond agencies do not care how they do it (eg, increase taxes, improve efficiencies, and cut services) assuming it is sustainable.

NYC has mainly chosen the increased taxes route. The problem for them is revenue is not stagnant. It might decline. For example, the economy might sour and harm Wall Street and productive people will tend to flee to somewhere else with better services and lower taxes.

I am an anecdotal proof of concept. I moved from Nashville to a small city in East Tennessee. Although I pay only 3/4th the taxes of Nashville; the public schools are among the best in Tennessee, garbage pick up is reliable, junk and vegetation pickup is included, the parks and greenways are on par with Nashville, the streets are smoother, side walks more available, the public pools cleaner and well supervised, crime is much lower, fire responses quick and effective, ect. Furthermore, my new adobe does tolerate vagrancy, public use of drugs, illegal demonstrations, and illegal acts like drag shows for kids (the police chief said the owner would be arrested and the owner wisely decided to follow the law).

In sum, I receive better services and a better quality of life at significantly less cost. What is the difference? The primary reason is Nashville voters elect Dems' and my area elects Republicans and holds them accountable.

You can say that’s anecdotal, but the fact of the matter is Republican run towns and counties are much nicer, less crime, all the things you mentioned compared to Dem run shht holes all across America