The Mamdani Moments

[Taichiliberal]

View attachment 83769

Analysts and watchdogs warn this is classic fiscal gimmickry - delaying real problems instead of solving them. High earners continue fleeing New York due to taxes and policies, making future shortfalls even worse.
This is textbook socialist budgeting: spend now, gimmick the numbers, and hope someone else pays the bill later. New Yorkers and state taxpayers will ultimately foot the cost when the temporary fixes run out and reality catches up.
The only reason I even bother to pay attention to this guy is because we all know what a colossal failure him and his policies will prove to be. We are sure of it. What's worth watching is if the people there will learn from it, or stay on the same crazy path. I'm betting on the latter, saldy...

More negative speculation that protects the status quo ... which ain't working out for the folk NOT if inherent wealth or of the investor class.

You can regurgitate this all day and I'll just counter with reality:

No, New York City’s wealthiest are not fleeing the city after Mamdani’s win

Conservatives warned of a mass exodus if the democratic socialist won, but experts, and property data, paint a very different picture

www.theguardian.com

 

[Taichiliberal]

Get a better job frankie.

Translation: the Lying Fish' won't honestly debate, as that would entail conceding a point.

 

[Taichiliberal]

View attachment 83780

The limits of the maga troll mind. Pathetic.

 

[Taichiliberal]

View attachment 83777

Translation: another intellectually impotent magat resorting to moronic memes when he's failed to logiclly/factually prove his point. Pathetic maga propaganda.

 

[Taichiliberal]

View attachment 83772


There is no idea bad enough that Dumocrats won't jump at the opportunity first chance they get. This is a prime example of thaT. The ink isn’t even dry on New York City’s proposed pied-à-terre tax - and one Miami Beach tower is already counting the money.
At the Perigon Miami Beach, a 72-unit oceanfront condominium in Mid-Beach designed by Pritzker Prize-winning architect Rem Koolhaas’s firm OMA, developers say they logged more than $70 million in sales from New York buyers in the 30 days after the building reached its full structural height in early March.
It is no coincidence, on April 15, Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Governor Kathy Hochul jointly announced an annual surcharge on secondary homes in New York City valued above $5 million, targeting owners whose primary residence is elsewhere.
The city says it expects to raise $500 million a year. What nobody in Albany or City Hall seems to have accounted for is what happens south of the Mason-Dixon line when that kind of news lands.

And where is the proof that the base NYC company, much less the owners and upper management are relocating? Purchasing property and building in other states us SOP, don't cha know, and there is no document as to such a similar deal was in the works but scrapped because if Mamdani.

Once again, the Mydoch rag plays the maga mooks for fools.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

All you're doing is just regurgitating your opinions, disproved assertions, supposition and conjecture.... all that have been previously addressed in the chronology of the posts. Repetition does not a truism make, but your baby Goebbels act is all you magats have. I just enjoy exposing your ilk for what it truly is. Carry on.

I keep pointing out that there will be a reaction. This is the most common mistake made in 'What if' scenarios. The person making the scenario makes some change that they think will radically alter the outcome of some historical event. What they fail to do is consider the reactions that will occur to that change and how they will affect it.

You are doing the same thing here. In essence, you say, Mamdani's tax plan will work as advertised and the Rich will do nothing different... Well, the Rich WILL react to his tax plan, and Hochel's. They may not do that instantly, but they will do it. The plan will NOT go as advertised because the system in which it is being enacted is very complex and there is no knowing for certain what the reactions to it will be, but there will be reactions and they will negatively impact the plan.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I keep pointing out that there will be a reaction. This is the most common mistake made in 'What if' scenarios. The person making the scenario makes some change that they think will radically alter the outcome of some historical event. What they fail to do is consider the reactions that will occur to that change and how they will affect it.

You are doing the same thing here. In essence, you say, Mamdani's tax plan will work as advertised and the Rich will do nothing different... Well, the Rich WILL react to his tax plan, and Hochel's. They may not do that instantly, but they will do it. The plan will NOT go as advertised because the system in which it is being enacted is very complex and there is no knowing for certain what the reactions to it will be, but there will be reactions and they will negatively impact the plan.

There will be reaction. The problem is that both of you seem to think your prediction is a certainty.

Whether it will work or not...is a guess. There is no concrete history which will show that one or the other is even more likely.

Get over yourselves.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

There will be reaction. The problem is that both of you seem to think your prediction is a certainty.

The question isn't whether a reaction will occur or not, because it will. The only question is the magnitude of the shortfall in revenue the tax produces. Mamdani's figure is the 'perfect storm' where there is no reaction other than to just pay the tax. Most sane experts and such are saying he'll get 50 to 60% of what he thinks he'll get.

Whether it will work or not...is a guess. There is no concrete history which will show that one or the other is even more likely.

It won't work. Raising taxes while raising spending solves nothing for a budget that's already teetering on bankruptcy.

 

[Lionfish]

And where is the proof that the base NYC company, much less the owners and upper management are relocating? Purchasing property and building in other states us SOP, don't cha know, and there is no document as to such a similar deal was in the works but scrapped because if Mamdani.

Once again, the Mydoch rag plays the maga mooks for fools.

Sweet Jesus, you are not a very bright bulb.

10 Major Companies Flee New York in 2026 Amid Tax, Regulation Exodus to Florida and Texas

NEW YORK — A wave of high-profile companies has accelerated its departure from New York in 2026, citing soaring taxes, burdensome regulations and a shifting political climate under Mayor Zohran Mamdani as key drivers behind the ongoing business exodus to lower-cost Sun Belt states like Florida and

www.ibtimes.com.au

New York loses $1 trillion in Wall Street business as firms flee the city: report

Of 158 NY-based companies managing $993 billion in assets, 56 have decamped to Florida, including hedge fund tycoon Paul Singer’s Elliott Management and closely-watched stock picker Cathie Wo…

nypost.com

158 financial firms with assets under management worth $1 trillion have left New York City, here's why

The companies have relocated their headquarters from New York City to Southern US states like Florida. | World News

www.hindustantimes.com

 

[Taichiliberal]

Sweet Jesus, you are not a very bright bulb.

10 Major Companies Flee New York in 2026 Amid Tax, Regulation Exodus to Florida and Texas

NEW YORK — A wave of high-profile companies has accelerated its departure from New York in 2026, citing soaring taxes, burdensome regulations and a shifting political climate under Mayor Zohran Mamdani as key drivers behind the ongoing business exodus to lower-cost Sun Belt states like Florida and

www.ibtimes.com.au

New York loses $1 trillion in Wall Street business as firms flee the city: report

Of 158 NY-based companies managing $993 billion in assets, 56 have decamped to Florida, including hedge fund tycoon Paul Singer’s Elliott Management and closely-watched stock picker Cathie Wo…

nypost.com

158 financial firms with assets under management worth $1 trillion have left New York City, here's why

The companies have relocated their headquarters from New York City to Southern US states like Florida. | World News

www.hindustantimes.com

Your first sentence is sheer projection. A common thread in all your examples is that these companies are relocating SECTIONS of their business. Only about 1% of your examples are totally closing shop and relocating. And some of these shifts were were happening YEARS BEFORE MAMDANI WAS A CANDIDATE, MUCH LESS MAYOR.

GOT THAT GUMBY?

AND THEN THERE’S THIS:

Fact Check: NYSE Did NOT Announce It Is Fleeing Mamdani's NYC, Relocating From Wall Street To Texas -- All-Electronic Dallas Branch Was Announced Eight Months Before Election Day

Did the New York Stock Exchange react to Zohran Mamdani's victory in the mayoral election by relocating to Texas from its 230-year base on New York City's Wall Street? No, that's not true: Intercontinental Exchange, the company that owns and...

finance.yahoo.com

Learn yo comprehensively read, gumby.

 

[Taichiliberal]

The question isn't whether a reaction will occur or not, because it will. The only question is the magnitude of the shortfall in revenue the tax produces. Mamdani's figure is the 'perfect storm' where there is no reaction other than to just pay the tax. Most sane experts and such are saying he'll get 50 to 60% of what he thinks he'll get.


It won't work. Raising taxes while raising spending solves nothing for a budget that's already teetering on bankruptcy.

This from a right wing work who is in denial of the disaster of 30 years of reaganomics, much less the wealth friendly tax systems in NYC emphasized by Ciomo and Adams.

 

[Taichiliberal]

I keep pointing out that there will be a reaction. This is the most common mistake made in 'What if' scenarios. The person making the scenario makes some change that they think will radically alter the outcome of some historical event. What they fail to do is consider the reactions that will occur to that change and how they will affect it.

You are doing the same thing here. In essence, you say, Mamdani's tax plan will work as advertised and the Rich will do nothing different... Well, the Rich WILL react to his tax plan, and Hochel's. They may not do that instantly, but they will do it. The plan will NOT go as advertised because the system in which it is being enacted is very complex and there is no knowing for certain what the reactions to it will be, but there will be reactions and they will negatively impact the plan.

Wr done this dance, and all you've got is parroting of maga wishful thinking. Unless you've got another angle, I'd say you're done here.

 

[Taichiliberal]

There will be reaction. The problem is that both of you seem to think your prediction is a certainty.

Whether it will work or not...is a guess. There is no concrete history which will show that one or the other is even more likely.

Get over yourselves.

Thing is the tax will add money to yhe coffers. The final effect on the budget or on the threats by the wealthy business has yet to be seen.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

This from a right wing work who is in denial of the disaster of 30 years of reaganomics, much less the wealth friendly tax systems in NYC emphasized by Ciomo and Adams.

"Reaganomics" didn't bring us what has ballooned the federal budget, Democrats did.

From the New Deal, to Great Society, to Obamacare, what has made the federal budget grow while stunting national productivity has been--as it has proved to be everywhere else it's applied is the growth of the Social-Welfare state. Today, programs almost all instituted by Democrats since FDR, to expand the social-welfare state account for roughly two-thirds of the federal budget. These programs are rife with fraud as we've seen recently, and they produce little ROI.

Massive tax systems are required to support such programs and eventually choke the life out of any nation stupid enough to enact them.

 

[Taichiliberal]

"Reaganomics" didn't bring us what has ballooned the federal budget, Democrats did.

From the New Deal, to Great Society, to Obamacare, what has made the federal budget grow while stunting national productivity has been--as it has proved to be everywhere else it's applied is the growth of the Social-Welfare state. Today, programs almost all instituted by Democrats since FDR, to expand the social-welfare state account for roughly two-thirds of the federal budget. These programs are rife with fraud as we've seen recently, and they produce little ROI.

Massive tax systems are required to support such programs and eventually choke the life out of any nation stupid enough to enact them.

Your first sentence just proves my point, which makes te rest of your drivel an unnecessary read. Here's some facts for you to deny:

Column: How Reaganomics, deregulation and bailouts led to the rise of Trump

The establishment was good at making big promises, but in the end, they left few crumbs on the table for the middle class.

www.pbs.org

 

[Into the Night]

The first sentence of the Lying Fish's says it all ... his personal ideology takes precedence over historical fact and current reality. The chronology of the posts shows valid documentation that debunks his revisionist clap trap. But like his Cheeto Jeezus, he can NEVER concede a point or actually error. He just parrots different versions of his absurd propaganda.

Once I expose these maga doormats for the lame wannabe Goebbels they are, I just sit back and watch them sputter and fume before I put them back on "ignore" for awhile.

YARP. Try English. It works better.

 

[Lionfish]

The Tackyleftie is on a roll, but he never sees the forest for the trees.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Your first sentence just proves my point, which makes te rest of your drivel an unnecessary read. Here's some facts for you to deny:

Column: How Reaganomics, deregulation and bailouts led to the rise of Trump

The establishment was good at making big promises, but in the end, they left few crumbs on the table for the middle class.

www.pbs.org

That's just the usual opinion based on socialist drivel. The Rich paid less taxes... that's evil! Who gives a shit what the Rich pay so long as it is what is required by government? Making the Rich pay more to government doesn't equal more GDP. Government is a near zero ROI.

For the Middle Class, the upper portion has grown in size due to those in the middle of it accumulating more wealth. The bottom portion of the middle class has held relatively steady.

What is causing that change is the upper portion of the middle class are now far better educated and paid for their knowledge while overpriced factory jobs have vanished and the smarter high school and some college types make up the lower and middle portions in things like the trades or what manufacturing jobs remain.

The poor stay poor because the majority of them are lazy and stupid. The world doesn't need strong backs and weak minds anymore.

The PBS article is trying to argue the model of society in the 1950's.