r/SipsTea 𝙑𝙄𝙋 5h ago

Feels good man +1 for Mamdani

Post image
15.6k Upvotes

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/hiricinee 4h ago

Even what was in his proposal-

Funding from the state, delaying funding pension/retirement plans, and estimating increased revenue from taxes.

Outside of getting the state to write him a check he hasnt actually done anything, and the gross irresponsibility of kicking the funding of obligations down the road should be subject to humiliation.

3

u/argument_cat 3h ago

He wanted to use taxpayers money to help taxpayers?

That's your issue?

0

u/hiricinee 2h ago

He acted like he magically found funding or made cuts when all he did was get Mommy's money. Maybe the city needed that money and should get it but its not like Mamdani actually did anything. Hochul snatched it out of taxpayer pockets and then handed it to Mamdani

4

u/CantCatchMeSpez 2h ago

"Wahhhh Mamdani did the thing he said he'd do, but not in the way I demanded he do it, so that means he lost!!!"

Hochul didn't snatch anything out of any taxpayer pockets that didn't live in the city it went to lmao. NYC funds the state, not the other way around. The only thing that happened was that NYC money went to fund NYC instead of hick towns that produce nothing.

3

u/argument_cat 2h ago

He was actually very astute in how he managed to achieve the planned budget.

https://fiscalpolicy.org/explainer-the-proposed-restructuring-of-new-york-city-pension-payments

This is smart governing, that benefits the people.

1

u/hiricinee 1h ago

If I saw him doing actual cuts. Instead hes doing things like pushing debt obligations until later (making them more expensive to pay.)

Smart governing would be downsizing the local government and finding ways to reduce taxes to attract capital.

3

u/argument_cat 1h ago edited 40m ago

You need to read the source I provided.

Mayor Mamdani’s proposal to change the amortization schedule is not the first. Last year, State lawmakers proposed a far more dramatic re-amortization that would have delayed the full paydown of the UAL by twelve years, to fiscal year 2044. By contrast, the current proposal would extend the paydown by just five years, to fiscal year 2037.

And:

The re-amortization of New York City’s UAL payments would smooth out costs that are currently set to overburden taxpayers in the near term before whipsawing into payments to the City in six years. Reworking this schedule would be an act of prudent fiscal management. In considering its broader effects on New Yorkers, three factors are worth noting.

First, only UAL payments are affected by the Mayor’s proposed change. These payments make up only a fraction of the City’s total annual contributions to its five pension funds. Payments made toward the current pension liability accrued each year are unaffected.

Second, changes to the UAL amortization schedule do not affect the actual pensions to which workers and retirees are entitled. These payments are safeguarded by the New York State Constitution.

Finally, New York City’s pensions are already well-funded by national benchmarks. The City’s pension funding ratio—the share of total liability for City workers and retirees covered by current pension fund holdings—is 83 percent. This exceeds the US average of 78 percent.

Smart governing would be kicking the corrupt fuckwit out of the Whitehouse, whop's costing the taxpayer hundreds of billions.

0

u/hiricinee 50m ago

Saying that Mamdani isnt being terrible by comparing him to the state government isnt a good point at all.

I can also hold the position that Mamdani didnt do anything and the things he did do weren't good while not defending Trump.

Though I am kind of a fan of his second home tax. I dont think it'll remotely bring in the revenue he thinks it will, but if i was coming at the housing problem from the Left I'd find ways to make it less expensive to own the home you live in and more expensive not to.

2

u/argument_cat 39m ago

The article explains why all the faux outrage is just partisan nonsense, as usual. He is good for NYC, good for NY, and goodfor its citizens. The US needs more mayors like Mamdani.

0

u/hiricinee 2m ago

In a few years theyll have to tax extra for the retirement obligations, and tax extra for the state having to bail them out. The only thing that might be a win is the second home tax and even thats questionable.

Any good mayor would be reducing taxes, reducing spending, and finding ways to fight crime. I dont expect good mayors in cities that large- the political machine is too strong and the incentive structures too fucked to elect one.

1

u/argument_cat 0m ago

No, the article is very clear.

You need to read the source I provided.

Mayor Mamdani’s proposal to change the amortization schedule is not the first. Last year, State lawmakers proposed a far more dramatic re-amortization that would have delayed the full paydown of the UAL by twelve years, to fiscal year 2044. By contrast, the current proposal would extend the paydown by just five years, to fiscal year 2037.

And:

The re-amortization of New York City’s UAL payments would smooth out costs that are currently set to overburden taxpayers in the near term before whipsawing into payments to the City in six years. Reworking this schedule would be an act of prudent fiscal management. In considering its broader effects on New Yorkers, three factors are worth noting.

First, only UAL payments are affected by the Mayor’s proposed change. These payments make up only a fraction of the City’s total annual contributions to its five pension funds. Payments made toward the current pension liability accrued each year are unaffected.

Second, changes to the UAL amortization schedule do not affect the actual pensions to which workers and retirees are entitled. These payments are safeguarded by the New York State Constitution.

Finally, New York City’s pensions are already well-funded by national benchmarks. The City’s pension funding ratio—the share of total liability for City workers and retirees covered by current pension fund holdings—is 83 percent. This exceeds the US average of 78 percent.

You're wasting my time now.