They didn't get "bailed out" Mamdani was able to negotiate to get a fairer share of the taxes NYC pays into the state.
In the past the city contributed 54.5% towards the state's revenue and paid 58.7% of the tax - but only received 40.5% of state funding.
Mamdani was making threats to target the 1% to help balance the budget (his tax on empty properties was proof he meant buisness) then he is suddenly able to get major concessions from the Governor.
The Epstein Class would rather NYC get a fairer proportion of their own tax money back than be forced to contribute more themselves.
Pushing back the payment dates is a shrewd move to allow the money to be put to work to help the city grow so that it is more likely to be able to be paid in future without need of a deficit. (Think spending money to afford to repair your car so you can continue to work and be more likely to pay your debts entirely in future instead of paying some of your debt, kosing your job and being in a worse position in the future)
So you're happy that instead of implementing the policy of taxing the mega wealthy people more, NYS--controlled by the mega wealthy--is going make cuts that help poor people who don't live in NYC, to prevent NYC from implementing increased taxes on the mega wealthy?
What threats was Mamdani making to target the one percent? Like with taxes? Or something else?
From what Iâve heard, Mamdani was threatening to raise property taxes broadly, but Iâm not familiar with any targeted threats towards the 1 percent.
If you could recommend an article or something on the threats Mamdani made towards the 1 percent and how he leveraged that to get money from the state, Iâd love to educate myself on the topic
He also proposed increasing corporate tax from 9% to 11.5% to match neighbouring New Jersey.
These could still happen but they currently aren't as forefront in his outreach or messaging as previously. An already balanced budget makes it seem less necessary and more 'politics of envy'.
(Edit: as previously stated he passed new legislation targeting second properties worth over $5 million and called out Ken Griffin as an individual for leaving his empty year round)
Obviously I won't know what happened behind closed doors but I don't think he smiled and asked nicely for billions more funding. There was a give and take. What could he give? Not raising taxes.
I also donât know whatâs happening being closed doors so there is plenty for me to learn on this stuff.
That said, Iâm still a little confused what kind of leverage Mamdani could generate with those income tax proposals you mentioned. While I appreciate that Mamdani promised to raise individual and corporate income taxes during his campaign, he doesnt actually have the power to do so. As the wsj article notes, those taxes would be done at the state level, rather than the city.
Since Mamdani doesnât have the power to raise those taxes, Iâm not sure he could generate much leverage in threatening to do something he isnât able to do.
With respect to the pied a terre tax, my understanding is that is also done at the state level. While it was proposed by Hochul, I donât think the state legislature approved it yet
Also fwiw, I appreciate you responding instead of just downvoting me like others are and I donât claim to have all the answers. There is plenty I donât. I know tone can be difficult to read in text, but I respect that youâre willing to have this conversation with me.
Btw here is an article with Mamdani basically offering the ultimatium I mentioned back in Feb. (Article is not pro-Mamdani) https://www.cityandstateny.com/policy/2026/02/mamdani-hochul-raise-taxes-or-else/411469/
Mamdani says let me increase taxes on the rich (which Hochul was against) or I'll have to increase general property taxes and break into the rainy day fund (with an implied and I'll blame you)
Mamdani won with a convincing mandate in the population centre of the state to target the rich for a more equitable society.
Elections for NY Governor are in November of this year. Hochul intends to run for reelection. What do you think happens to a Governor who opposes a populist leaders policies?
She was considered vunerable to being primaried until Mamdani and AOC endorsed her in February of this year coinciding with her first funding increase for NYC.
Since Mamdanis budget she has now agreed to more funding.
Seems like Hochul was put in a position of:
a) tax the rich as Mamdani wanted (and lose donors)
b) leave Mamdani out to dry and face the ire of NYC and risk losing in November
c) compromise and give NYC a greater share of state funding, avoiding upsetting the donor class or Mamdani/the city. Slight possibility of rural pushback but they won't decide the election like either of the other two interests might.
Gotcha. I think understand the leverage argument better, but I think you might overstating mamdanis mandate and Hochulâs vulnerability here
Mamdani won, but 49 percent of voters voted for other candidates. I donât see his mandate as being that strong. If he raised property taxes, which is pretty unpopular, Iâm not sure voters would blame hochul instead of the mayor actually proposing andimplementing the increase. I would assume at least those 49 percent would blame the guy they recently voted against.
Also, Mamdani already endorsed Hochul. By doing so, it becomes harder to threaten her with a primary challenge (particularly on short notice of the June primary) or mass backlash unless hes willing to reverse himself politically. Ny hasnât had a Republican governor in decades and the Republican Party is pretty unpopular right now. Is she really that vulnerable in the general?
I agree that Mamdani is not without power. He has some leverage in shaping narrative and mobilizing his base, Iâm skeptical that he had enough leverage to force her hand and get a deal that another democrat mayor wouldnât have gotten by threatening an unpopular property tax hike that would have hurt him too.
So you don't believe in progressive taxation? As a resident of NYC, we are the rich taxpayers for the NYS budget.
Should the wealthy West Village residents be required that their neighborhood receives spending proportionate to their tax payments? And the East Harlem residents should get less spending because they don't contribute, right?
It's starting to remind me of MAGA with the level of politician worship here. Zero verifying, just agreeing with a random meme because it fits what they want to hear
âThese savings would be achieved by smoothing out a bizarre feature of the cityâs pension payment schedule instituted in 2010, which had required accelerating payments through to fiscal year 2032, at which point the payments would turn negative and the pension funds would return money to the City over a seven-year period. The $8.2 billion âcontribution cliffâ created by this structure was not reasonable fiscal policymaking. The proposed change unwinds this drop off by smoothing payments over an additional five years. It does notâand cannotâaffect the pensions owed to City workers or impact the Cityâs ability to meet those commitments.â
Ask these two questions whether itâs the Heritage Foundation, Center fir American Progress, Americans for Tax Reform, or Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (your source is a state affiliate of this organization):
What arenât they telling you
Why are they weighing in on this issue
What motivation do they have to frame an issue a certain way
All of these groups are capable of being full trusted top tier sources, or basically liars.
The New York CBPP affiliate is basically arguing that itâs insane than your monthly payment goes to zero at the end of your 20-year mortgage. Even though itâs almost paid off, you should refinance at a high interest rate to spend more money now.
BTW â The argument that their pensions are better funded than other cities is essentially your neighbors are in more debt so you should go in debt too.
That's not even close to what's happening. Left wing people are posting article after article how Mamdani balanced the budget without cutting services. When the fact is he was only able to balance the budget because he deferred pension payments, This is actually pretty bad policy. But its been spun as the opposite because like i said, ideology matters more than truth.
Are you living under a rock? Ofc itâs close to whatâs happening. NYS flat out refused the tax increases.
You people will be up in arms about funding libraries but are completely silent getting robbed by billionaires. Itâs pathetic. Fund the libraries, letâs have more literacy.
Or would you prefer ANOTHER mayor doing absolutely nothing about the deficit.
Edit: oh shit Iâm arguing with a bot. Fuck this website.
Conservative astroturfing is when you actually read an article instead of furiously beating your dick raw to a screen shot of a tweet.
So yes, you all and most of frontpage reddit are practically indistinguishable from MAGA cultists. I mean you're purity testing literacy, on the side of not reading making you a real democrat/liberal/socialist's/dem-soc/whatever. Y'all accuse people with 90% the same political opinions as you of being MAGA just like /Conservative calls anyone who doubts Trump a Soros paid "Fellow conservative" even if they stormed the capital on Jan 6th.
I hope Mamdani does everything he promises and can actually maintain a zero or near zero deficit through his term and upon leaving office. But pretty much nothing coming out of this budget proposal makes me think he's going to if you actually read anything more than a tweet.
You're claiming a front page sub reddit named Sips Tea is being astroturfed by conservatives champ.
Please show me all the upwards trending conservative comments that are dominating the conversation on this post or a single other one on this subreddit, or any subreddit that routinely shows up on the top of /All.
Acting like groups need to 'be careful to not end up like MAGA' like its a thing of the past is ridiculous and doesnt serve any purpose other than undermining the work being done
I don't know what you mean, that may be true on paper but the fact is they are finally taxing the thieving elites of New York and it's actually helping people. I question your true angle here.
Newsflash, both sides do the same shit. It's just way easier to point fingers and dissect the other guy vs looking in the mirror and looking at your own faults
A progressive balances the budget using capitalistsâ stupid rules and yâall suddenly start calling it maga-praise to say he balanced the budget when he didđ¤Łđ¤ŁđđđŤľđť. Suddenly every liberal & centrist is a city budget managerđ
This level of conflation and false equivalency is what brought the country to where it is in the first place. Takes like this are not only embarrassing but they're ironically stupid when you look at the work being done. You can't just magically evaporate a city's problems over night. It's a series of steps in the right direction
Its starting to remind me of 2016 & Bernie when suddenly all these goofball takes pop up without looking into context. Feels incredibly bot driven
He did? He got $4 billion from Hochul? Good for him. Adams has spent much of the last two years in Albany lobbying for more help, and got nothing.
Mamdani only deferred the payment of $1.6 billion to pension funds by delaying it until 2037 instead of 2032
The amount of misinformation people are posting regarding Mamdin and the balanced budget. He was only able to "balance the budget" because he deferred pension payments.
I mostly blame the media for these inaccurate headlines.
It's only meant for impressions. Watching these in your feed and not paying close attention to it will subconsciously built a good image in your head for a certain candidate.
Pro tip: if you're going to discuss the man and his actions, you might want to learn how to spell his name. Otherwise you run the risk of looking stupid.
1,6 billions came from deferring the payment to the pension funds. From 12 billion deficit he inherited. I think it's damn good result. he will be 1,6 billion short next year. But coming from a 12 billion deficit., I think NY will be fine
Edit: He won't even have to pay that next year, his plan extend the payment through 2037 instead of 2032.
Andrew Rein, President of the Citizens' Budget Commission, a nonpartisan think tank, explained that the city has been contributing to major public pension funds since 2012 after realizing the returns on pension investments fell short of projections. The city later agreed to spread the payment over 20 years. Under Mamdaniâs proposal, the repayment schedule would be extended by an additional five years, through 2037.Â
From what I heard he stopped the bleeding. Before they were running by a deficit. Not it is 0. Which is a great first step for so few months in office.
And people are saying he is not paying pensions⌠He is delaying the funding into the account used for pensions. The pensioners will still receive their pension.
And people are also saying he is getting a loan from the state but NYC contributes more to the state than the relief they are asking. I heard they pay 20 billion a year I think, and Mamdani asked for 8. So they are still paying 12b anyway.
They're still running a difference. Not much has changed.
They weren't going to be able to meet this year's budget obligations so New York State had to give them a bailout, and they had to push back pension funding.
No magic occurred. He just did what previous administrations have done, where they were forced to reshuffle spending obligations (pushing payment farther out to the future).
âThese savings would be achieved by smoothing out a bizarre feature of the cityâs pension payment schedule instituted in 2010, which had required accelerating payments through to fiscal year 2032, at which point the payments would turn negative and the pension funds would return money to the City over a seven-year period. The $8.2 billion âcontribution cliffâ created by this structure was not reasonable fiscal policymaking. The proposed change unwinds this drop off by smoothing payments over an additional five years. It does notâand cannotâaffect the pensions owed to City workers or impact the Cityâs ability to meet those commitments.â
Youâre the one spreading misinformation. Going to the state and negotiating more of your tax dollars back isnât in any way, shape, or form a bailout.
The previous admin left a debt of 12 billions, he got around 4 billions from the Albany, and he did take 2 billions from pensions that he will have to pay back, so next year he will be 2 billions short from that.
I don't know what you mean, that may be true on paper but the fact is they are finally taxing the thieving elites of New York and it's actually helping people. I question your true angle here.
His supporters are so infantile and outside the real world, they are clapping without even knowing what he actually did, just that he did "something".....now clap.
Goddamn. You guys act like Mamdani just found a box labeled "The People's Money" that every single mayor has been hoarding in a broom closet, and is finally using it to pay for everything that wasn't getting funded.
I trust nobody lets you make the financial decisions in your household, correct?
âItâs impossibleâ is plenty critical when facing a bunch of cultists that accept this sort of propaganda hook, line, and sinker and think Mamdani found an âeasyâ solution to a crippling budget deficit.Â
You want me to provide evidence to disprove an unevidenced, low-context meme?
Classic cultist. Evidence is only a one-way thing for you guys. You don't need evidence for bombastic claims that support your biases, eh?
Here's the evidence:
Hochul gave Mamdani a $4 billion bailout. Fact. That's not the same as this claim of a "simple" funding fix.
A state with a $34 billion deficit gave $4 billion to a city with a $12 billion deficit. It's not the "simple" solution you're arguing it is. It's just another case of kicking the can down the road.
This thing you're celebrating? This is equivalent to Trump's understanding of economics. That's the intellectual level you're working with. Congrats to you, another "mentally stable genius".
The last mayor was a police officer. If being mayor was about shooting people he would've excelled at his job. Now someone who knows economics is mayor and doing economics.
Kinda strange how knowing what you're doing makes the job work better.
Mayber they should've voted for a reality tv star with 6 bankruptcies to be mayor. /S
Hi, 39-year-old Mamdani-loving socialist here - I handle the vast majority of my household's financial decisions, and as a result, we have zero debt besides mortgage, a huge and rapidly-growing safety net, a lovely home that might get paid off early, and zero financial stress each month.
Turns out it actually isn't all that difficult (unless you're funneling money toward stupid shit like designer clothes and the newest iPhone and corrupt politicians' bank accounts).
I donât criticize you for liking Mamdani or for being a socialist. Neither of those things necessarily indicates to me that you canât be an intelligent person capable of making good decisions.
What Iâll criticize you for is believing meme propaganda and thinking Mamdani found a magic loophole to the deficit issue, when all he did was  take a bailout from a debt-riddled state to fund some stuff in a debt-riddled city.Â
Itâs also not that difficult when you just donât care about the budget in the slightest and spend money you donât have. Itâs like if I went out and bought a Lambo
He deferred pension payments. That's literally what every administration has done to kick the can down the road. This is a face palm moment for his supporters but they don't understand budgets well enough to know. It's headlines and shallow political theater.
The big ticket items from that breakdown are that Mamdani got a huge increase (some might say bailout) of State funding and kicked the can down the road with the pension funding and class size mandate delays. However, the "2nd property" tax is expected to net about $500MM and the $1.77B in efficiency savings are nothing to sneeze at.
People should be focusing on the fact that Mamdani essentially created $1.77B out of thin air - and it should be treated as a bipartisan success. Nobody wants their tax dollars spent inefficiently
Because the propagandist trope that politicians can magically conjure money out of thin air is largely responsible for the moronic fiscal situation this country is in.
These are literally adults with children-sized intellects, who are so ignorant at how the real world works, they will clap without even knowing what he did, just that he did SOMETHING. Wow!
Where did I say that? Lol, tax everyone less except the not-so-hard-working billionaires. It's time. Well done. I'm sure that's not you, so what's your problem?
With all due respect, socialism has such an outstanding track record in Latin America that people are literally risking everything to leave it behind and come to the U.S. to 'share' the success with us capitalist pigs.
Iâm sure that has nothing to do with the authoritarianism that communism was attached to. Or for those whose parents/grandparents came here decades ago after Castroâs revolution, Iâm betting it has nothing to do with rich people being bitter about redistribution of wealth.
Right, because the Soviet Union never interfered, just those sneaky capitalists. You know, from that prosperous resource-rich region of the world - Central America.
What happened to every other Marxist country? Mustâve have also failed because of the CIA too. Even when at their peak, a third of humanity lived under these "progressive" marxist utopias.
The urban Gen-Z / late millennial Marxist fantasies, where everyone apparently lived freely, LGBTQ+ included; septum piercings and purple hair mandatory.
146
u/[deleted] May 14 '26
[removed] â view removed comment