Progressive Politics

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.

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.

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

A big slug of money from the state was the real budget closer.

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.

deferred payments to pension programs

Oof, not too sure about this one...

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.

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.

No need to seize the means of production if they simply abandon it...

prowlr to the proplr!