[Terr_]

> Silicon Valley

In this case, does that mean something more like "an exclusive clique of lucky tech-bros that converge on political views in their private channels"?

As a larger region/industry, I can't see why SV would "panic" about a city mayor of a different city in another state thousands of miles away, no matter how populous the city is.

[wat10000]

I imagine that is indeed what it means. It's probably like using "Washington" to describe the higher-ups in the US government. It doesn't really refer to the ordinary people who live there.

[jerlam]

The "panicking" people mentioned in the article all seem to be more politically oriented than tech. No one thinks Linda Yaccarino is a tech-bro or in Silicon Valley.

[mlinhares]

Its just a bunch of people that see "socialist" and panic.

[code_for_monkey]

they dont even know what it means, its just the big scary word.

[lazyeye]

Either that or they understand exactly what it means, the actual reality of it as compared to the "sounds nice in theory..."

[cosmicgadget]

What's the reality of having a mayor who is described as socialist?

[lazyeye]

Well I guess he is "described" as a socialist in the same way the sky is "described" as blue. Your question is easy to answer...look at all of human history and around the world right now to see what you get when the far left gets their hands on the levers of power.

[Terr_]

Yeah, we were plagued by [checks notes] the New Deal followed by multiple decades of American prosperity and the growth of the middle class.

[archagon]

I see European quality of life, not some imagined demons.

[cosmicgadget]

Surely you understand that the word socialism means a lot of different things to different people?

You argument is that this is "just generally bad"? Or somehow a socialist mayor will be the downfall of western civilization or something? It seems like if his policies are bad, he won't be reelected and you'll have a more succinct example to point to than "all of human history". The great thing about a mayor is that they have very limited ability to impact civil rights, Giuliani notwithstanding.

[shadowgovt]

In the US, "socialist" describes the people supporting Medicare for All and the Green New Deal. So in the US, socialism would be a net positive.

[lwansbrough]

That seems like a reductive defence of a platform that is pitching rent control and socialized housing without addressing underlying demand. Which is basically the recipe the entire western world has used for half a century and has resulted in the worst housing price inflation in history.

The hard truth is that New York isn't even remotely dense enough for the demand. The entirety of lower Manhattan from Canal St. to midtown is "low" density. As is everything above 59th. And this is codified. So no wonder NYC housing prices are out of control. NYC should look like Sao Paulo based on demand.

[ericjmorey]

He's been very clear about addressing underlying demand through increased supply.

[ModernMech]

I'll break it down for you.

For a long time, neoliberals like Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have run the Democratic party. They have enjoyed soaking up the progressive votes from the more left parts of the party, but they have done everything possible to prevent those elements from rising too high in the power structure. You saw it in 2016 when the party leadership coalesced around Hillary to nudge out Bernie, and again in 2020 when they did the same with Biden after Bernie won Nevada.

Neoliberals and the left have a lot of tension. The left believes that liberals, due to their affinity for corporations, will side with fascists over socialists when it comes time to choose sides.

To date, liberals have proven that correct. The result has been for my lifetime that no matter which party is in power, corporations are treated favorably.

But times are changing. The neoliberals are getting old, and it's time for them to retire and pass the torch. My whole life, I'm 40, Democratic leadership have been pro corporation liberal boomers: Clinton, Gore, Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Schumer... they held onto power as long as they could, but time is ticking and it's time for millennials to takeover.

And millennials are decidedly less pro corporation. We are not like our parents, we are not going to treat corporations like our parents did. For my whole adulthood, we've been told by the boomer generation that our ideas about society and governance are not good, and progressive ideals are unelectable. AOC began a wave of congressional elections that proved them wrong, at least for local congressional elections. Then we started to see rising stars like Buttigieg get top leadership positions in government. Now, Mamdani represents the next milestone -- a progressive millennial at a high executive position for a huge city like NYC.

So that's what this race is about and why it has national implications. It's progressive versus neoliberal, and if the progressive wins, it's going to be harder in the future to claim that progressives are unelectable. If he (god forbid) ends up doing a good job, then it's going to be harder to claim progressive policies are wrongheaded.

It's also millennial versus boomer. Cuomo and Adams are both boomers. It's probably not lost on a lot of people that if they lose, it might be the last time a boomer will ever be elected as Mayor in NYC. Mamdani's election would really be the end of the post 9/11 era for New York and the start of something new for the city.

So why is SV anxious? Mamdani is a harbinger for a new age. It means the neoliberal boomers are going to the wayside, and the progressive millennials are coming to power. Which, if you listen to what they have to say about billionaires, might make you nervous if you're a billionaire.

[lwansbrough]

Too bad most of this is meaningless, and the actual policy is the only thing standing between America and another 50 years of housing crises. When the so called progressive millennial is pitching rent control as the solution to housing in the largest city in the US you already know it's fucking Joever.

Social policy is popular among millennials, that doesn't make it good. Mamdani and his followers are wilfully ignorant to the root causes of the issues NYC is facing.

[ericjmorey]

You should probably learn more about his housing policy.

[psd1]

We are on HN, which daily shouts about MVP and finding market fit.

Young progressives can iterate. Old people cannot, conservatives cannot.

I agree with you about the 50 years: it started in 1980, if I had to pick a specific year, so, good news!

[hello_moto]

shrug British Columbia (where Vancouver is located) has rent control and people continue to live normally.

Billionaires don't like it when politicians put a target on them.

Billionaires (or Landlords) have been hiding behind class war for thousand years. They continue to find ways to divide and conquer.

The moment a popular politicians start to poke em a little bit is the moment where they will react swiftly

[lwansbrough]

I live in Vancouver. People do not live normally here lmao. I pay $2300 for 430sqft in a city where the median household income is $82,000.

I’m surprised you chose Vancouver for your argument. Are you aware this is one of the worst housing markets in North America for exactly the same reason as NYC?

The one thing BC is doing correctly right now is getting rid of a lot of the market controls and introducing a lot more ways to build new housing, without any explicit focus on “affordable housing” (because that’s a tar pit.) These changes (by a social-forward party like the NDP no less) are what are easing pressure on the market, though it is still deeply unaffordable.

[hello_moto]

> Are you aware this is one of the worst housing markets in North America for exactly the same reason as NYC?

That's because you pointed out rent control in your earlier argument. It's not the end-all-be-all. I don't know why you picked that specifically knowing that Vancouver has rent control and to some degree it's fine.

His platform is more than rent control no?

> The one thing BC is doing correctly right now is getting rid of a lot of the market controls

BC got rid of Airbnb and that's one factor among many others that influence the pricing today: high interest rate, Trump tariff, China econ not doing well hence not a lot of Mainland China money flowing to Vancouver like it used to be. All these contribute to weaker demand.

The getting rid of zoning, while I fully support it for my own benefit, is yet to be seen IMO.

[toomuchtodo]

Great comment, regret I only have one upvote. Won't be appreciated here unfortunately.