I see it slightly differently.
I think it was a case of have and have nots. I think the sensible haves' accounted for the Cuomo turnout.
I think that while the focus will be on the numbers "fleeing" the city, it'll be interesting to see what ends up coming into the city for the perks.
It'll be much to do about nothing as the crux is the financial piece and considering they saw a 10% increase in revenue over last year have have 81b to work with (with 34b property tax and 18b personal income).
I do agree they'll be fine though but it'll be a nice barometer.
@unplucked_gem
I do agree they'll be fine
I am interested by what you think you mean by this. Even a lot of leftists are saying simply something along those lines. Not as many are coming out and saying that they expect significant improvements either right away or by the end of his term.
What exactly is meant by "they'll be fine"? Does that mean that they will overcome his lack of experience, radical ideas, etc.? Even the latest Democrats polled say that their policies should include both socialist and capitalist ideas. Only 22% say the policies should be more socialist. Even most of the Democratic leaders were hesitant and late with support for him.
But if his top priorities are affordability (especially housing and rent freezes), universal free child-care, etc., how do you compare if 'they are fine'?
How do you evaluate his 'defunding the police' stance? Will it result in a reconciliation with the police union? Will it be a comparison of their crime rate before and after him? Do you compare the cities affordability before and after him? Do you compare the tax rate before and after him?
Or do you compare all of these metrics against the national average? Do you compare them against the 'Big City' average?
It is the largest city and a huge tourist draw. For many reasons it will be fine. Like the guy said the other day, "“I would hope for the best of this case, and New York will survive. You know, we survived Bill de Blasio."
But he also said this, "I have a lot of friends who are Democrats, and they’re idiots,” he continued: “I always say they have big hearts and little brains. They do not understand how the real world works. Almost every single policy rolled out failed.”
So, is simply 'surviving' those 'failed policies' what qualifies as "being fine"?
Even some 'supporters' couch it this way: "Actually I don't think governing will be that difficult for Mr. Mamdani. To start, he is not constrained by myriads of restrictions within which his predecessors had to work. Those restriction were mostly upshots of quid pro quo deals, made with rich supporters to ensure their financial contributions. And then, there are a lot of highly intelligent, experienced, individuals who will be happy to work with Mr. Mamdani, giving him advice to avoid known pitfalls. Because of the past rampant corruption in the City Hall, these very individuals would have not touched working for the City Hall with a 10-foot pole."
It is just odd that even some of his ardent supporters seem to have lower expectations than one would expect from a young and energetic guy that has all of these progressive ideas.
@Raiders22
It means the right is implying that NYC will immediately bankrupt and turn into something out of the purge.
Im suggesting the sheer volume of money in the city can weather whatever perceived storm is coming and the city will exist.
I'd be more worried if I still lived in Buffalo or Rochester (or anywhere up state) as they'll be the one's to suffer the consequences as per usual.
@unplucked_gem
Gotcha
Thought you still had a place there.
I do not think anyone expects them 'to immediately go bankrupt and turn into something out of the Purge'. I think some see it as more of a steady decline in multiple areas or even an acceleration of decline in some areas.
I think a lot of folks see other places as leading indicators (London, SF, etc.).
Just because they are so overwhelmingly large and the financial center of the world and a huge tourist spot means they will still be all of that.
But one side, I think, defines 'fine' as hoping implementing extreme Leftist policies will not make it much worse and that it will be one and done. But what if it is a longer time period and what if the next guy is just as extreme, or more so.
The other side seems to think it will be 'fine' because as I pointed out a large portion still want to implement a lot of capitalism in the policies. So, they do not seem to deep down feel that these policies are all that hopeful to turn around the key measures that affect the folks. It would seem they would be more exuberant and expectant that things will 'immediately improve'. It is hard for even these folks to ignore how NYC has fallen off in the last few years in key areas. So, going even further in the extreme direction does not even seem that hopeful from them. They seem simply more elated that a Democrat won. It seems if even a small% of higher income leave and small% of lower income are both incentivized to change their location it will not be 'fine'. It is very akin to all of the folks that thought their debt would instantly go away, etc. once Obama was elected.
'Fine' means very different things to both groups in this situation. It is by no means a univocal usage of the term.
Then how much is Hochul and the state legislature handcuffed. The city cannot be allowed to slip much more by Albany.
Established in 1995,
New York has their mayor 
Hot Forum Topics
