[octaane]

You guys have it all wrong. There was only one candidate for the dem party, Here's the list:

1) Cuomo. Sexpest who has been accused by many women of some pretty shitty stuff. Also a member of a multi-generational dynasty, which is not good.

2) Mayor Adams. Federally indicted by the Feds. They have a 99% conviction rate. Not because they're corrupt, but because they only go after people who have dome some really egregious, illegal shit.

3) Mamdani. Millennial candidate. No dirt. Other that some stupid stuff he said while he was young, his policies are relatively common sense and middle of the road, and are aimed at leveling the playing field.

Gee, who should I choose? [[said all of NYC today]]

[JumpCrisscross]

The fact that I was seeing Sliwa favourably speaks to the candidate quality in this race.

> No dirt. Other that some stupid stuff he said while he was young

Stupid stuff he credibly disavowed.

I’m still blown away that after De Blasio he was the only one, when asked a foreign policy question, who said he’d put city priorities first.

[yahoozoo]

It was pretty pathetic when, during one of the mayoral debates this year, most of the candidates including Cuomo said the first country they would visit as mayor would be Israel. Thankfully, younger generations aren’t falling for it anymore.

[chasil]

It is unfortunate that, after the Spanish Inquisition, Jewish refugees were welcome in Istanbul, but the current receptivity is so much colder.

This is exactly the point where the historic tolerance of the middle east is most direly needed, but common ground in so many contexts is absent.

I hope that we can put ourselves back together. We've seen the consequences this year of its lack.

[JumpCrisscross]

> where the historic tolerance of the middle east is most direly needed

Sure. Broadly. But there is one correct answer a mayoral candidate could give on such an issue, and it’s the one Mamdani gave.

[chasil]

This is from Eisenhower's "Cross of Iron" speech:

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies—in the final sense—a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.

This world in arms is not spending money alone.

It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.

The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than thirty cities.

It is: two electric power plants, each serving a town of sixty thousand population.

It is: two fine, fully equipped hospitals.

It is: some fifty miles of concrete highway.

We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat.

We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than eight thousand people.

This—I repeat—is the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking.

This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.

https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/states-war/humanity-hanging...

[JumpCrisscross]

President Eisenhower. Not mayor. President Eisenhower’s portfolio properly contains these things. Mayors should not be travelling to foreign countries on official business outside a very narrow remit. Humanitarian activism isn’t one of them.

[chasil]

So let's take a look...

Eric Adams: Lebanon 2024, Israel 2023, Quatar 2022

Bill de Blasio: Israel 2015

What should not happen obviously does.

[aeternum]

China found a way around this by manufacturing all their civilian ships to military standards.

Maybe guns or butter is a false dichotomy. Or perhaps the even tougher lesson: a country with an information economy ends up with neither.

[aprilthird2021]

> Jewish refugees were welcome in Istanbul, but the current receptivity is so much colder.

We are all receptive of Jewish people. We are not receptive of our country, who cut off food benefits, cut people's flights, cut people's medical insurance subsidies, funding and enabling a state where of the native born population, only Jewish people get to vote and have autonomy, and other non-Jewish ethnicities live under the control of a state they have no rights in purely because of their ethnicity. No one supports that part

[csomar]

Jewish or not Jewish, receptivity was always joint about circumstances and interest. Based on that, refugees or people in special circumstances will be either accepted or rejected. Also, any group of entities can get into these special circumstances depending on what is happening in that time.

[pjc50]

As a Brit who has been exposed to the blanket coverage of this on social media: Mamdani is going to be like Sadiq Khan. Popular with people in the city, while those outside run endless weird fantasy "news" scare stories because he's a Muslim.

[CommanderData]

GBnews has been unrelenting and it's frankly worked to turn non-Londoners against London and Khan.

It's disgusting they're allowed to vilify him so much without any accountability.

[jpfromlondon]

as a proud Londoner I'd like to see him held accountable for his own lies and questionable behaviour.

[pjc50]

.. such as? Compared to previous mayor Boris Johnson?

[tim333]

Yeah likewise interested as a Londoner.

The thing that annoys me the most is that by scapegoating Khan they avoid fixing the problems that are the responsibility of others. Like knife crime - the tories cut 1/3 of the police force, crime went up in London but also in the rest of the country but the papers are all lets slag Kahn for it which is jolly fun I guess but doesn't stop the stabbings and phone snatchings in a way that the central government which controls the laws and budgets could do.

[tim333]

I'm a Londoner who voted for Khan. There's a difference in that contrary to all the scapegoat stuff in the right wing press, Khan has had largely sensible middle of of the road policies. And where he has deviated from the average, on air pollution, it's been stuff I'm in favour of - I have desire to get sick/die from that.

Mamdani seems like a nice guy but some of his policies seem a bit bonkers - state owned retail outlets and the like.

[rkuykendall-com]

Isn't it proposing running like five grocery stores to test? That's not bonkers or radical. Or even expensive. It seems like the type of experiment HN would love.

[lotsofpulp]

It’s an unnecessary experiment that wastes time. Kroger/Costco/Walmart/Albertsons all have 2% profit margins. These are extremely optimized, large scale businesses. No city government is going to do it for cheaper.

Which means the most prices can be lowered is 2%.

Which means the problem in food deserts is the customers are too poor.

Which means the solution is giving poor people money.

But that is not a winning political position, so we have all these nonsense proposals.

[acdha]

> Which means the most prices can be lowered is 2%.

For people who live near one of those stores and can afford to shop competitively. In many urban environments, the competition is smaller shops or places which know you aren’t going to spend an hour driving elsewhere.

I live in DC, and we have a Safeway near us which often charged 2-3 TIMES what Costco charged. Once a second market opened in our neighborhood, just like magic the prices at Safeway came down.

The corner market was basically never competitive on prices because it’s tiny and carries the small sized products which always work out to a higher cost.

[rsynnott]

> In many urban environments, the competition is smaller shops or places which know you aren’t going to spend an hour driving elsewhere.

I'm kind of curious what is different about the US environment that makes this the case. Most large European cities have supermarkets (national chains) all over the place. To the point that it gets a bit silly; I've got about five Tescos in easy walking distance, which have the same prices as other Tescos (one is a Tesco Metro, which is slightly more expensive).

[rsynnott]

It doesn't look like there _are_ any Walmarts in NYC? Are supermarkets in NYC actually offering the same prices as supermarkets in places where there are Walmarts?

[nobody9999]

>It doesn't look like there _are_ any Walmarts in NYC? Are supermarkets in NYC actually offering the same prices as supermarkets in places where there are Walmarts?

That's true. There are a couple of Costcos, but since I don't own a car (like most New Yorkers) it's not all that useful.

And supermarkets in NYC (in car-centric places some NYC supermarkets are smaller than gas station convenience stores) are definitely more expensive than supermarkets outside NYC.

What's more, the "food deserts" that Mamdani's proposal is trying to address don't have any supermarkets and folks are forced to take the bus or the subway to shop for groceries. I'd also note that most subway stations do not have elevators, making it much more difficult to shop for any length of time, especially for older, less mobile folks.

[ceejayoz]

> Kroger/Costco/Walmart/Albertsons all have 2% profit margins.

And yet, plenty to spend billions on share buybacks.

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/kroger-albert...

[lotsofpulp]

What else should Kroger do with their $2.6B net income from $147B of revenue? Buybacks are just a more tax efficient form of distributing profits compared to dividends, which is the reason people invest in stable businesses that are not going to experience growth.

Otherwise, it would be a charity.

[TulliusCicero]

> It’s an unnecessary experiment that wastes time. Kroger/Costco/Walmart/Albertsons all have 2% profit margins.

And yet Aldi's prices in the states are more than 2% below Albertson's. Almost like there actually is more room for improvement?

[lotsofpulp]

Aldi is a limited service grocer that doesn't have to deal with employee unions and costly departments like meat/deli/bakery/etc.

That is the underlying story, is that fewer Americans can afford the full service grocer (or maybe don't want to patronize due to smaller household sizes and less cooking). Also, Aldi has successfully fended off unions, which are mostly a thing legacy grocers like Albertsons and Kroger have to deal with.

[Izkata]

Part of Mamdani's plan is to increase taxes on white neighborhoods, which could be used to offset cost and make it seem cheaper.

[nobody9999]

That's a straight up lie.

Please show me where any plan like that is published. And specifically which neighborhoods that every white person will pay more taxes. The actuarials say I should live another 25 years or so. I'll wait.

Or are you referring to the proposed 2% increase in income taxes for folks making over USD$1,000,000/annum, which has exactly zero to do with location (other than NYC as a whole)?

Such an increase, while suggested by Mamdani, is not within the purview of the mayor of NYC to implement. Rather, any tax increase must be passed by the state legislature and signed into law by the governor. The most NYC's mayor can do is ask the state.

Are you that uninformed? Do you even live in NY State?

[tim333]

Ah maybe.

[crowbahr]

When a church runs a football nobody blinks an eye, when a city runs 5 grocery stores as a pilot in food deserts...

[rozap]

It's a pilot of 5 publicly funded grocery stores in food deserts. I don't know if food deserts exist in London, but they're pretty bad in the US. Like, you cannot buy a vegetable for miles. It's a sensible policy to eliminate food deserts just from a public health perspective.

[rsynnott]

It doesn't seem like _that_ bonkers an idea? It'd be a trial, and, well, if they can't compete, they can't compete. And if they _can_ compete, then they will drive down prices.

People probably thought the UK's state-owned bank was a bit bonkers at the time (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girobank) but it _worked_; it forced private banks to expand access and to modernise. And then eventually it couldn't compete. But it's hard to consider it as anything other than a success.

(This is all assuming that NYC supermarkets have a competition problem in the first place, though. Never been to NYC, so wouldn't know.)

[BobaFloutist]

From a distance it looks like Cuomo is also a generational talent when it comes to being a lazy, unmotivated campaigner.

[evan_]

Not to mention raising and spending money campaign money.

[apparent]

> his policies are relatively common sense and middle of the road

Free buses and free child care are not remotely common policies in the US. Ditto for govt-run grocery stores. And freezing rent for controlled units.

[cogman10]

> Free buses and free child care are not remotely common policies in the US. Ditto for govt-run grocery stores.

While not common, free buses do exist throughout the US and Europe.

Free childcare is uncommon. IDK where that actually exists.

Government run stores is actually very common. Many states run the liquor stores. A few cities have government run grocery stores.

Freezing the rent on rent controlled buildings isn't common but rent control itself it quite uncommon. It's probably the easiest for Mamdani to accomplish.

[OkayPhysicist]

Free childcare for low income families is extremely common, even in the United States. Subsidizing childcare is even more common. And it's not that expensive, because spending tends to get offset by increased tax income and reduced consumption of other wellfare benefits (from parents who choose to re-enter the workforce).

As for universal free childcare, I'm aware of it's existence in a number of places in Germany (Berlin, in particular), driven by having been an extremely popular public benefit in East Germany.

[zitsarethecure]

New Mexico is experimenting with free child care. Canada has nationalized its own system and while it isn't free, it is heavily subsidized.

[pauldelany]

Correct - common sense policies != common policies

[AnimalMuppet]

Doesn't make them middle of the road, though.

[LordDragonfang]

Free childcare is an extremely business-friendly proposal (increases the workforce, reduces the need for costly parental leave). I'd say I don't know why it's not more popular with right wing neoliberals, but I know why (they're more anti-government than pro-economy).

Rent control is increasing popular and common in liberal areas (which NYC is)

[debtta]

Don't forget:

Eric Adams born 1960

Andrew Cuomo born 1957

Curtis Sliwa born 1954

Mamdani born 1991

On policing, on New York's relationship to Israel, on public transit, the so-called 'mainstream' is actually 'the average view of people over 60'.

[sotix]

The median age in New York City is 36.8 years old[0].

[0]: https://popfactfinder.planning.nyc.gov/explorer/cities/NYC?c...

[brandonagr2]

Government run grocery stores are middle of the road? What would progressive ideas look like on that spectrum?

[throwaway81523]

Plenty of red states have government run liquor stores. And army bases have government run grocery stores along with government run everything else. I don't see the problem here. Progressive version presumably would be free groceries for everyone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_grocery_store

[moregrist]

When I lived in Pennsylvania, the state-run liquor stores had a monopoly on selling wine and liquor. This survived Republican and Democratic administrations for decades.

Mamdani’s proposed grocery stores aren’t a monopoly. Whether they’re a good idea remains to be seen, but they’d be competing against privately owned grocery stores. As I understand them, they’re mostly intended for areas without a local grocery store (food deserts), which seems like a reasonable thing to explore.

[aeternum]

Note that they don't have to be a monopoly to cause a problem. Usually the way things go is these state-run grocery stores get subsidies. The goal is to provide food in food deserts, not to be profitable. Over time the subsidy inevitably grows meaning higher taxes for non-gov grocery stores. This leads to a cycle where the state-run stores pushes out the corp-run stores with the thinnest margins.

Ultimately only the bougie grocery stores remain in rich neighborhoods and now you have to really hope that you can continue funding those state-run stores or you just made the food desert problem a whole lot worse.

[ecshafer]

And people hate the government run liquor stores so much they drive to Delaware to buy in wine and liquor in bulk, since the stores are expensive.

[camel_Snake]

Hi, that's not why people go to Delaware for those kind of purchases. It's the lack of tax.

The actual MSRP from PA wine and liquor stores is very competitive, since it's one of the largest single buyers of alcohol. Selection could be better though.

[spatialspice]

Hard agree. I may cross state lines for large purchases like laptops, but the liquor prices aren’t so bad that I’d drive >30min for better deals.

[ch4s3]

State liquor stores are terrible, and I’ve never heard anyone say a nice word about on base grocery stores.

[ikety]

Highly disagree. The commissary on most military bases are awesome. Spent most of my life going there with my parents. Not sure where you heard they were bad. Never got that impression from any military serving people, like ever.

[mothballed]

Now imagine how the commissary would turn out if instead of being placed in a spot where any commercial business would love to exploit (center of military base where every family has employment, a process for permanently kicking out people who engage in major crime, and private competition controlled unless you go through a security checkpoint) -- instead you put them in many of the places I witnessed food deserts in major US cities that had underemployment, elevated crime, outsiders afraid to enter during the day and ~never enter at night, bars on every window, and every other establishment has you slide your cash in a rotating tray adjacent to a bulletproof window.

[cityofdelusion]

I feel like the commissary these days is really far behind private grocers. Yeah, 15 or 25 years ago they were awesome, but now it just resembles a poorly stocked (and much smaller) Walmart. Regional grocers have gotten really good in my lifetime. Used to go to the commissary regularly to save money and have a good selection, but those days are just long past. Same deal with base liquor stores, they are merely "OK", but again your regional private option is just so much nicer in the 2020s.

[afavour]

That’s just goal post shifting. The point is that government owned direct to consumer stores exist in areas of all political leaning.

[Ferret7446]

You suggested that this is good because it is similar to a thing, and many people pointed out that thing you compared it to is bad. That is not goalpost shifting, that is you demonstrating that this is in fact bad.

[afavour]

I never said anything about good or bad. It was a response to:

> Government run grocery stores are middle of the road?

[throwaway3060]

That's because liquor stores originated from an earlier incarnation of the culture wars. That was a long time ago, and I don't think anyone seriously believes in that justification now, but the inertia remains.

[cogman10]

They still exist in Idaho (where I live) because the state doesn't believe in advertising alcohol.

I think that's a pretty good reason for them to exist even today. We don't need the market competing to get people to drink more.

[ch4s3]

It’s the goalpost you set. They’re hardly mainstream if everyone hates them.

[afavour]

> They’re hardly mainstream if everyone hates them.

I think maybe you and I have different definitions for the word "mainstream". To me it has nothing to do with popularity and everything to do with what is normal and everyday.

[cogman10]

I don't hate them. I have one in walking distance from my home. It's a liquor store, what should I hate about it?

The only people I see complaining about them are religious teetotalers.

[senordevnyc]

I was in the Navy and I loved the on-base grocery store. A big part of it was that I was overseas and it felt like home, but also the prices were great, it was clean, and had a decent selection.

[PyWoody]

I love my state liquor stores.

The staff are treated and paid well, the stores are well stocked and clean, and I pay tax free on some of the lowest prices in the country.

[lotsofpulp]

But why? Liquor is the cause for a very high portion of police, insurance (property and health), and other costs that can’t be translated into dollars.

Why shouldn’t society recoup some of those costs from the users? And why should society subsidize those costs?

It’s interesting that it was politically acceptable to charge tobacco users more for health insurance, but not politically acceptable to charge alcohol users more for health insurance.

[ch4s3]

> And why should society subsidize those costs?

Allowing private business isn't a subsidy.

> Why shouldn’t society recoup some of those costs from the users?

That's what the taxes are for.

[shawn_w]

I have fond memories of the Navy commissary my parents did most of our food shopping at when I was growing up. Huge variety of reasonably priced goods.

[bogomipz]

I would say that state-run liquor stores and subsidized city-run grocery stores such as what Mamdani proposes are not at all comparable. The former is a giant cash cow - a profit center while the latter is an entitlement program i.e a mandatory budget expense. To give an idea of the amount of money involved in state-run liquor stores, consider the state of New Hampshire's report from last year:

>"In FY2024, total income before transfers was $144.7 million with the total net profit transfer of $140.0 million. Of the $140.0 million, the Liquor Commission transferred $122.0 million to the General Fund"[1]

[1] https://gov.liquorandwineoutlets.com/wp-content/uploads/2025...

[cogman10]

Why does a government ran entity need to be a huge money maker?

NYC has a $6B cop budget. They even have subs. Yet nobody worries about that. A grocery store could be ran at a deficit. More than likely it will be neutral or will turn a slight profit.

[bogomipz]

>"More than likely it will be neutral or will turn a slight profit."

Based on what exactly, just your opinion? Obviously you know nothing about the grocery business which is a notoriously low-margin business, between 1-3%. The only way that large grocers like Krogers and Albertsons are profitable is purely based on volume. You also realize that groceries are perishable items right? You also realize these are labor and energy inensive operations right? And that there's tons of competition? And of course shrinkage. There is zero chance that it would operate at a profit or break even. By the way it's been tried before look up Baldwin, Florida or Erie, Kansas for examples of city-run grocery failures. There are others as well.

Lastly, nothing about any of this in any way comparable to NYPD as a budgetary item. Comparing retail food to public safety is just really bizarre.

[cogman10]

Baldwin and Erie were both in small towns. I can't find any information on Erie, but Baldwin ultimately saw a $100->$200k yearly shortfall for a city of 1400.

If they wanted to accommodate that shortfall, then that translates to a $150 yearly tax burden per person. They instead chose to shutter the store.

The stores lost money in both cities, but in the process baldwin sold over $1M in produce breaking even at least once.

> There is zero chance that it would operate at a profit or break even.

The Baldwin example shows that breaking even is definitely possible. And for a city with the population density of NY, it's probably easier to pull off. It's certainly easier to support these stores if there's a shortfall.

> Lastly, nothing about any of this in any way comparable to NYPD as a budgetary item. Comparing retail food to public safety is just really bizarre.

But it is. The NYPD is simply overfunded. They can buy toys and tanks while paying the cops to catch people jumping turnstiles and play candy crush.

A pretty small fraction of the NYPD budget could cover shortfalls. That's why it's brought up. These grocery stores, even if they never turn a profit, won't be costing the city $100M, or $10M. They likely won't even shortfall to $1M. For a city with a budget of billions, adding 1M in is really just a drop in bucket.

And in the process, such a grocery store will help far more people than the average NYPD cop does.

[dboreham]

Was going to say our state had government liquor stores until a couple of years ago. The sky remained in place.

[hakfoo]

Ration books for all?

[NaomiLehman]

Free food

[johnnyanmac]

Government runs a lot of businesses alongside private estates. Postal is the biggest example. Why is this super unusual? I don't know if it's middle of the road, but I don't think it's socialism.

Progressive ideas would be price controls on groceries to curb inflation, or seizing the means of production by making a major stake in a major food chain.

(side note: I think it's hilarious that Trump is doing this with Intel and potentially Tiktok and few have labeled it as such).

[nice_byte]

"communism is when government do thing"

[fastball]

Communism is literally when the government owns the means of production. Owning the means of distribution is not far from that at all.

[debtta]

No, that's literally socialism. Communism is something different.

[cogman10]

I disagree that it's even socialism as NYC isn't outlawing or using the emoluments clause to take control of private stores. It isn't ceasing the means of production in any sense.

The Mamdani plan is to put in stores where no stores exist. That's just a city ran store. Something that used to be pretty common in the US.

[mothballed]

Stores exist there. They have some foodstuffs even. They have bars on all the window and your money is handed through a rotating tray under a bulletproof glass with tiny holes in it so you can talk to the cashier (who also has a shotgun resting under their cash register).

That is because that is the viable model in those areas to actually run a store without having your staff egregiously injured/assaulted and not have everything not nailed down stolen.

This ends up getting reflected also in higher prices of foods in those areas, to reflect the cost and lower supply of those willing to take those measures. So people will call it a 'food desert' -- not because you can't get food there (though it mostly sucks and is shelf stable stuff) but because nothing there resembling a walk-around middle-class grocery store exists.

Failing to take those measures, or taking the measures and not raising prices enough to cover the costs, will likely end up in the state losing money, that is, they will be forced to seize the capital of private citizens to fund the state's commercial offerings.

[nicwolff]

I think you mean "eminent domain" – the emoluments clause prohibits government officials from accepting gifts, payments, or titles from foreign states.

[cogman10]

No.

Communism only happens after a revolution overthrowing the current government and replacing the entire economy with the state overseeing it. Note the word entire.

Socialism is when you have the public own entire industries. For example, how the oil industry in Norway is owned by the state.

Having the government do something or own a business is neither communism nor socialism. It's simply a state owned thing. It's not, for example, socialist for the government to have a parks department.

A city ran store is not the city owning the means of production. There will still be private stores throughout NYC. The areas where these stores are being targeted are where those private stores have chosen not to deploy.

Communism isn't "everything I didn't like"

[shawn_w]

There is no government in an end stage Communist society.

[zitsarethecure]

Interestingly "no government" also appears to be exactly what is happening in the US with what some people might describe as end stage Capitalist society.

[rsynnott]

It's kind of astonishing that they couldn't find a non-terrible establishment candidate, really.

Like, they mightn't have won, but surely a boring establishment candidate would at least have beat Cuomo.

[parineum]

> his policies are relatively common sense and middle of the road, and are aimed at leveling the playing field.

That's not true at all. He is not even "middle of the road" in the Democratic party.

[npteljes]

I disagree with this. I mean, it's as straightforward for me as you wrote it. But,

1. It hasn't worked like this when they elected Trump for the second time. Back then Kamala should have been the only valid candidate, according to this thinking.

2. Mamdani got 1,036,051 votes and Cuomo got 854,995. This is not exactly "all of NYC" as you imply.

[Ey7NFZ3P0nzAe]

From wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Adams

> In September 2024, a series of investigations into Adams's administration emerged. Adams was indicted on federal charges of bribery, fraud, and soliciting illegal foreign campaign donations. Adams pleaded not guilty to the charges. He alleged that the charges were retaliation for opposing the Biden administration's handling of the migrant crisis. In February 2025, the Department of Justice in the Donald Trump administration instructed federal prosecutors to drop charges against Adams. Judge Dale Ho dismissed the case against Adams on April 2, 2025

[shagie]

For a time warp from The Onion - June 22, 2021 : De Blasio: ‘Well, Well, Well, Not So Easy To Find A Mayor That Doesn’t Suck Shit, Huh?’ https://theonion.com/de-blasio-well-well-well-not-so-easy-to...

I'd also call out October 17, 2025 : Zohran Mamdani Refuses To Share Plan For Making Rich Richer https://theonion.com/zohran-mamdani-refuses-to-share-plan-fo...

[AbstractH24]

It’ll be interesting to see the headlines the onions writing by summer 2026.

For all I dislike him, Trump essentially squandered the political capital he had on things that are shiny, motivated by ego, and created clickbaity headlines that single out small subsets of the American populous. He could have done far far worse and less reversible things to America. We’re now at the start of the end of his presidency, with focus first turning to midterms and then his replacement.

I don’t expect Mamdani to do much better with his political capital.

[api]

I don’t know a ton about Mamdani but he doesn’t seem narcissistic.

I agree with most of his goals but have serious doubts about the viability of the methods. We’ll see.

My biggest doubts are around the idea of price controls, which almost always lead to perverse incentives. The economy finds a way to sneak in an effective price increase via other means. Either that or you create a landed gentry of sorts, or a “landed rentry” for rent control. You get a class of beneficiaries locked into place and nobody else can get in.

I do like seeing different ideas get tried. I like experiments, and I think we should have more of them. The endless tape loop of 1980s-1990s Reagan/Clinton politics is clearly not addressing some glaring problems.

[r00fus]

> My biggest doubts are around the idea of price controls,

DeBlasio froze rent for rent-stabilized units for 3 years straight. Literally everything Mamdani campaigned on is entirely possible and funding straightforward.

Not easy, but emminently doable.

[api]

Not questioning whether he can do it, just whether it will help make the city affordable long term.

Of course he’d also pro density and new construction, which would actually help.

[AbstractH24]

But also he can only do it for a very small fraction of housing in the city, about 16,000 units. And even that Adams may undercut before he leaves office.

In contrast to how he suggested it.

[AbstractH24]

While not a narcissist, I can’t tell how much he actually see this election as a stepping stone to higher office. Maybe even following in the footsteps of a one term senator…

And I do think he’s adherent to a fairly narrowly defined set of left wing principles and ideologies.

Like you, I agree there’s no harm in trying new things because there’s always what to learn. But I don’t exactly expect them to go well. Hope I’m wrong though and if nothing else it’s becoming incredibly clear we need a new generation of leaders in this country. To end this loop, like you said.

[nialv7]

well 40% still voted for Cuomo.

[jen729w]

That 40% would have voted for a potato if it'd been wearing a red tie.

[jen20]

Manifestly not - Cuomo ran as an independent, and a Republican did run.

[kacesensitive]

The Republicans in the Whitehouse told them to vote Cuomo

[tartoran]

I feel that Sliwa suggested Mamdami over Cuomo.

[johnnyanmac]

I remember hearing that Cuomo called to get an endorsement from Trump. I'm not sure how much of that went through, but it would explain why it seemed like Cuomo completely ate Silwa's votes. 7% even for NYC is absolutely below par for Republicans.

[dralley]

> Mamdani. Millennial candidate. No dirt. Other that some stupid stuff he said while he was young, his policies are relatively common sense and middle of the road, and are aimed at leveling the playing field.

Look, Mamdani ran a good campaign, and if I was an NYC voter (I am not) I'd probably vote for him out of the options provided.

However, this just is not true. Many of his policies are neither "common sense" nor "middle of the road". Especially not on education and dealing with the homeless and public transit. And lots of his dumb comments were from like 2 years ago, not 12 - he was not "young" when he said them.

[bayarearefugee]

> And lots of his dumb comments were from like 2 years ago, not 12 - he was not "young" when he said them.

If you're talking about the "globalize the intifada" comment, he actually never even said that, but a whole lot of people (you among them, it seems like?) have been brainwashed into thinking he did through political maneuvering.

The root of that whole drummed up controversy was him refusing to blanket condemn the phrase when media people (never attributing it as something he himself had said) kept asking him to.

And he was always very clear what his reasons for that were, which were extremely reasonable to anyone who isn't a kneejerk ultra zionist.

[aeternum]

Here's him talking about it for those that want to form their own opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggV2SeiGrVw

[timr]

It's so depressing that the entire Mamdani debate has become mired in Israeli politics. You can completely ignore that issue, and still have plenty of questionable stuff to talk about. He has repeatedly talked about defunding the police. Literally, not figuratively, and not that long ago [1a-c].

He said he wanted to close down Rikers Island, right in the middle of the debates [2]. He said that prisons are unnecessary [3]. He said he wants to empty jails [4-6]. His comments on crime and policing, in general, are quite extreme. I could set literally every other topic to the side, and this would be a voting issue for me.

These are his words. I'm not taking them out of context or reinterpreting them. About the only response to this stuff a reasonable person can muster is "he doesn't believe that now". Yeah, OK. I guess we'll find out...

[1a] "NO to fake cuts - defund the police." https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1277414510131916801

[1b] more on his historical comments on defunding: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/07/31/politics/mamdani-defund-p...

[1c] "dismantle" the police (in this case, the Vice squad): https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1336087694636707841

[2] "Yes, we have to close Riker's island" https://www.facebook.com/reel/1380642053476909

[3] prisons unnecessary: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/out-of-touch-ma...

[4] "the goal must be to abolish [prisons]" (plus multiple other variations on that theme) https://x.com/peterjhasson/status/1937682021276410317

[5] "The entire carceral system is an unreformable public health hazard. Defund & dismantle." https://x.com/ZohranKMamdani/status/1328828240757215234

[6] "what purpose do [prisons] serve?" https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1945929553274196188

[skeaker]

[1] does not mean no more police. The NYPD has $11 billion in funding and has offices all over the world for some reason when they should really just be city-sized for NY. They are overfunded, and he believes they should not be.

[2-6] indicate that our current prison system is punitive and does nothing in the way of rehabilitation or reform. No, he will not close every prison. Yes, in an ideal world we would not need hundreds of prisons full to the brim because we would actually rehabilitate and release people. This is hardly a fringe opinion and it is in fact a very common criticism of our prison system. Interpreting these statements as "he is just going to stop prisons and let all the violent criminals out in one go!!!" with no further though IS reinterpreting his words uncharitably because obviously that would be stupid.

[timr]

Re [1], he explicitly says the opposite in the posts I linked to. You're just ignoring what he literally says and writes, and substituting your own feelings on the matter.

Regarding prisons, again, he is explicitly talking about closing down prisons. He has moderated his rhetoric more recently on this issue, but no, your interpretation of the subject is not what he's saying here, and it clearly isn't what he means, even today.

He has a long history on these topics. I'm not misinterpreting his comments.

[skeaker]

He does not literally say the opposite. Either way, you'll see what I mean when none of this goes the way you think that it will. He's in office now anyways.

[johnnyanmac]

>Many of his policies are neither "common sense" nor "middle of the road"

It seems like common sense to hear "cityfolk pay taxes, buses are paid for by taxpayers. Therefore, bus rides should be free for cityfolk". There's a lot more to it, but most voters are not going to read the 50 page proposal that Mamdami would need to submit to the govenor to get the wheels rolling.

I think that's enough for it to fall under "common sense". Policy you can explain in 3 sentences or less. Homeless people need help, not to be arrested. Invest in an organization who makes sure that these people get help so they don't stay on the streets.

(I can't find his education policy on a quick skim of the website and plan).

[aidenn0]

...Said less than 51% of voters

[JumpCrisscross]

We can call winners this early. We can’t yet call margins.

[aidenn0]

Good point; still mathematically less than 60% if you trust AP's estimated remaining vote count.

[UncleMeat]

Does it only count if he gets 60% of the vote?

[kelnos]

The "said all of NYC" wasn't the best framing, but the entire post was about Democrats' choices, not everyone's.

Also not sure what value your comment has. Interpret things charitably. Your "gotcha" is not at all that.

[aidenn0]

Perhaps I misread the tone of the comment I replied to, but I have seen lots of "Everybody supports X" when X won with barely half of the votes, and less than half the voting-aged population voted.

[GenerWork]

>his policies are relatively common sense and middle of the road.

Rent control isn't middle of the road, it's 100% socialist. Same thing with city run grocery stores. He also wants to defund the police while replacing them with community outreach people, as well as raising the minimum wage to $30 in 5 years which is absolutely wild. None of this is middle of the road in any way, shape, or form.

[toomuchtodo]

The minimum wage not being indexed to inflation has been theft for decades. It would take a minimum wage of almost $60/hr to maintain purchasing power from 50-60 years ago.

https://www.epi.org/blog/the-value-of-the-federal-minimum-wa...

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/minimum-wage-york-2024-live-1...

https://livingwage.mit.edu/

Edit: If the system of “we make asset prices go up while labor prices are inflated away” gets to the point where a living wage is unobtainable (we are here), we can change the system. The name is irrelevant, it’s fundamentally “what are you optimizing for?”

This happens eventually (wage increases) due to global structural demographic working age population compression, the argument is really time horizon if we help people live better lives with dignity now vs years from now as labor supply declines.

https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/Slides_London.pdf

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

[kortilla]

You didn’t read your own link. The peak value of minimum wage was $12.12/hr in 1968 after adjusting for inflation.

https://www.epi.org/blog/the-value-of-the-federal-minimum-wa...

You cannot with a straight face claim bringing it to $60 has anything to do with inflation when the value it would need is right in that article.

[toomuchtodo]

I misspoke by not including more detail. $66/hr to match homebuying purchasing power of Boomers in the 70s. You can get away with less per hour as a living wage assuming reasonable rent, and in NYC, that is likely $30/hr (which we will get to as older voters continue to age out, and younger voters age into the electorate, and are engaged to push wages higher [exit polls show ~75% of New Yorkers 18-29 voted for Mamdani]).

https://www.epi.org/blog/a-30-by-2030-minimum-wage-in-new-yo...

> With the FBC cost data we can estimate a living wage that would allow workers to support their families. Table 1 shows that the living wage in 2025 is already above $30 an hour in Manhattan ($33.89), Queens ($31.31), and Staten Island ($30.68). While Brooklyn and The Bronx do not exceed this threshold, the costs facing these families will almost certainly continue to rise between today and 2030. These figures make it clear that discussions of a $30 minimum wage in New York City are not superfluous—they reflect the very real needs of working people throughout the city.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/guy-shared-just-high-min...

> Someone Calculated What The Minimum Wage Should Be Today Compared To The '70s In Order To Afford A Home

> Now, Chris's video isn't to suggest that minimum wage, at any point in its history, allowed people to buy homes outright. Rather, he told BuzzFeed, he wanted to highlight the ways in which "wages have decoupled from cost of living, housing prices, and broader economic growth over the last few decades."

> "The original purpose of the minimum wage was to ensure that even low-wage workers could participate meaningfully in the economy. Not just survive, but live with dignity," he said.

[TheCoelacanth]

That's more of an issue with housing prices drastically outpacing inflation because of dense housing construction being illegal in most of the country.

[almosthere]

So if minimum wage was $60 in a year you'll see a bread loaf for $900

[toomuchtodo]

Please prove this assertion. Show your math. I can pickup a loaf of bread for $1.42 in a state with a $15/hr minimum wage, as of this comment. What does a $30 minimum wage make it? $2? $2.50? The horror. $900? I am doing my best to be polite and charitable.

[almosthere]

Yes I was being sarcastic. But in CA when a typical wage went to $20 for Walmart or fast food, everything skyrocketed. At my grocery store you can get a bag of Fritos for $6 now, which should be no more than $2. If we triple the $20 (making it $60) we'll be paying $18 for a bag of Fritos. So yeah, I was joking a bit on the bread loaf, but we would be in an era of paying $600 for your grocery trip for 4 days of eating.

[mcdonje]

Prices went up everywhere, even in places without minimum wage increases.

[Shocka1]

I sense your frustration and I think they were probably being a bit sarcastic... I won't speculate on a loaf of bread, but I would speculate that everything from a loaf of bread to a home increases in price substantially if minimum wage were raised to $60. As wages increase, prices tend to follow, since workers across the spectrum demand higher pay.

I'm not against raising minimum wage, but economics is a very complex thing and changes like that need to be approached carefully.

[prpl]

The minimum wage should easily be 11-13 by any inflation metric you use for the last 40 years, and doubling that for a high cost of living place is reasonable.

Lots of states have state-run liquor stores, even super conservative ones.

It’s a smaller delta than you think.

[kortilla]

11-13 isn’t anywhere near 60.

Anyone who has shopped a state run vs regular liquor store knows how much worse the gov version is unless your goal is higher prices, worse service, and worse selection.

[bluecalm]

The reason state-run liquor stores make some sense is that we don't want to optimize alcohol sales. Neither on price nor volume. This is unlike groceries. The same reason state run monopoly on gambling makes sense but state run monopoly on car manufacturing doesn't.

[noobermin]

He has moderated on the police funding issue, and the rent freeze is for already rent controlled apartments.

[nobody9999]

>the rent freeze is for already rent controlled apartments.

That's actually not true. The rent freeze is for rent stabilized[0] apartments. Rent control[1] is a different program and is tiny in comparison.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_regulation_in_New_York#Re...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_regulation_in_New_York#Re...

[GenerWork]

>He has moderated on the police funding issue

So he already backtracked on a core election promise even before he got elected? Doesn’t bode well for his supporters expectations going forward.

[pkulak]

Seems like before you’re elected is the perfect time to adjust policy positions. Or, really, any time you’re presented with new facts.

[adrian17]

As far as I know, “defunding the police” wasn’t a campaign promise, let alone a “core” one. It indeed was the opinion he had in the past (and you can argue about whether he still thinks that privately), but there are also many statements from the last several months that he’s explicitly _not_ running on that.

[FrontierProject]

Core election promise? It was a comment he made half a decade before running for mayor. Perhaps it's time to update your Kool-aid detectors.

[emchammer]

It’s as if people can change their opinions about things as they become better informed.

[matsemann]

What a weird take. Isn't it better that he says it before the election? I think you just have it out for him, and no matter what he does you will find a way it's wrong.

[ryandrake]

When your road is all the way to the right, then yea, none of it is middle of the road.

[GenerWork]

Please explain how city run grocery stores are middle of the road politics. Perhaps they’re middle of the road when your road is all the way to the left.

[Epa095]

I see it as a middle of the road statement to say that government should work for its constituents, and help ensure that they get basic nessesities like shelter, food, schooling and health care (yes, I know that this is already controversial).

Using the market is well and fine, but if it for some reason does not work it's the government's job to find a solution which works. Think about how things are handled in emergencies. The neutral thing is to find a solution, not be married to some ideological ball and chain saying that THAT particular necessity must be solved in one particular way no matter what.

When that is said I don't live in NYC, idk how the food desert situation is there. But I have heard enough stories from credible sources that I would be surprised if it's all made up.

[fastball]

The problem with the idea that it is the government's job to ensure "necessities" is that the list of what is a "necessity" only ever gets larger – it never shrinks.

[Epa095]

I think if you go to Scandinavia or the UK you will find the opposite. Housing is an example of a field where the government was much more active pre the 80s. Idk if the US has had the same development, but it is certainly not a global truth that it only goes one way.

[pkulak]

The state should step in and run anything that the private market cannot. I don’t live in NYC, but if there’s a market failure in groceries, do it.

[timr]

There isn't a market failure in groceries in NYC. There's a huge number and diversity of stores, and profit margins are as low as anywhere else in the world. Also, of course, see the sibling comment who is complaining about grocery stores while using Amazon Fresh. There's a competitive delivery market.

Of all of his policies, I actually don't really care if he wants to try to put some grocery stores in grocery deserts. It probably won't work, but whatever.

[metabagel]

There aren’t any food deserts in NYC?

[bradlys]

Couldn’t do worse than the grocery stores in nyc that already exist. Terrible service, horrendous price, bad inventory, etc.

I did all my groceries in nyc via Amazon fresh for the last two years because of this.

[apparent]

Sounds like you have a great option then, no need for the govt to open taxpayer-funded stores.

[wk_end]

Really depends on where you are in the city; I used to shop at Whole Foods on the UWS and it was lovely, and when visiting this past summer my friend and I visited both the Bowery Whole Foods and the Wegmans near Astor Place and zero complaints with either of them.

But TBH I don't think the grocery deserts he's looking to service are going to be anywhere near where the average HN user lives.

[Ferret7446]

The market failure in NY is due to the local government, so clearly the local government stepping in to offer a replacement is the solution. On an unrelated note, I have a bridge to sell you.

[dboreham]

Cities run all sorts of things. What's the big difference between garbage trucks and sewers and a grocery store?

[ryandrake]

Also, several states have state-run beer and/or liquor stores. It's not some wild unheard of experiment. We've gotten so used to the acceptable political spectrum spanning from "far right" to "extreme right" that we forget what left even means.

I'm almost 50 and the last president we ever saw that was even remotely towards the left was in office when I was born.

[wk_end]

Whether or not public grocery stores are a good idea, the comparison to state-run liquor stores doesn't really make sense; the justification for state control of liquor sales is entirely different (arguably even kind of the opposite) as the justifications presented for public grocery stores.

[figmert]

> several states have state-run beer and/or liquor stores

Actually could not believe this, so had to look it up. I find this wild.

[jandrewrogers]

I lived in a state when the state-run liquor stores were closed and it transitioned to the private sector. It was a massive improvement, a big win.

The weirdest part of the transition was the fear mongering about consequences. This despite the reality that most states don’t have state-run liquor stores.

I’ve never lived in a state where state-run liquor stores weren’t worse than what you had in states without them.

[timr]

I mean, yes...but having lived in multiple states with various forms of state monopoly on alcohol sales: state-run liquor stores suck. Citing them as an argument in favor of state-run anything is sort of making the case for the other side.

[apparent]

The original claim was that his policies are middle of the road. Based on the very few US cities with govt-run grocery stores, it's pretty clear that the policy is not middle of the road. It is an outlier.

[slg]

Last I checked, if you wanted to buy more than a 12 pack of beer in the state of Pennsylvania, it had to be from a state run store. Is Pennsylvania socialist?

[lp0_on_fire]

I live in PA and can literally walk to a private beer distributor from my house and walk out with something larger than a 12 pack. There are no state owned beer distributors as far as I’m aware.

Most (not all) Liquor / Wine sales are somewhat monopolized by the state but it’s a remnant from prohibition and nobody except the people getting their palms greased by the system likes it.

[slg]

Fair correction, I apparently merged the laws about beer and liquor/wine in my mind. Beer in quantities larger than 12 packs comes from distributors which are regulated more than bottle shops but aren't state run, while it's liquor and wine that needed to come from state shops.

[throwaway3060]

In this regard, yes it is; the biggest reasons they keep it around are the jobs it provides and the money the state makes off of it. In return, residents get low prices but less choice, and in some areas, poor access. Most people hate it.

Only in the last decade or so has some competition been allowed.

[slg]

>In this regard, yes it is;

Great, then "socialism" doesn't have to be the scary word that it is made out to be in the US! We have at least 17 socialist states already.[1]

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholic_beverage_control_sta...

[loeg]

That's a pretty bad policy PA has, however you want to characterize it.

[slg]

I'd agree, but I would also point out that a state monopoly is a much more extreme policy than a few state run stores. And considering the discussion was about where these policies sit on the ideological spectrum, an example of a more conservative state with a policy further to the left does suggest that maybe this is in fact "middle of the road".

[danw1979]

The government selling food directly to it’s citizens represents the raised red fist of communism to American conservatives ?

[bix6]

$30 min wage sounds doable? CA took fast food min wage up to $20 and it’s been fine.

[loeg]

> CA took fast food min wage up to $20 and it’s been fine.

Reduced employment by 3% but otherwise fine, yeah.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w34033

A nationwide $30 minimum wage would have a significantly higher impact (most places have lower wages than California and $30 is more than $20).

[surajrmal]

3% of fast food jobs. Honestly that seems like a worthwhile tradeoff. Fastfood prices have increased a lot in recent years as well, but it's unclear how much if any is due to minimum wage increase.

[loeg]

Fast food jobs are where the higher minimum was imposed.

It's fine to argue it's a good tradeoff; I just want advocates to admit there is a tradeoff.

[what]

>fine

A medium fries is over $4 before taxes… over $1 more expensive than the rest of the country.

[toomuchtodo]

McDonald’s made $14 billion in profit last year. It’s not the labor driving the costs, it’s the profits.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44968997

Same with Chipotle.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45762671

Who pays the profits? Like tariffs, the consumer. You pay for these billions in annual profits.

[underdeserver]

McDonald's the corporation doesn't sell fries, they rent out real estate and franchise licenses.

What you really need to look at is the cost of labor for a random McDonald's franchisee.

[toomuchtodo]

> While menu prices did increase, costs rose by an average of just 1.5% –equivalent to about 6 cents on a $4 hamburger, down from the 15-cent increase reported in the September study.

Study: California's $20 fast-food minimum wage improves pay at small cost to consumers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43806608 - May 2025

https://www.axios.com/local/san-francisco/2025/02/27/uc-berk...

https://irle.berkeley.edu/publications/brief/effects-of-the-...

[kortilla]

What was their revenue and what was profit as a percentage of that?

If the profit percentage hasn’t increased, “record profits” is meaningless drivel that just means it kept up with inflation.

[kelnos]

I'm ok paying a little more for fries if it means the people making it and serving it to me are paid a living wage.

Regardless, the fries cost what the local market can bear, not what they "want" to charge for them.

[surajrmal]

Prices are not related to costs. That's just a lie to folks use to justify price increase to the market. Prices never decline when costs do unless the consumer is wise enough to know like in the case for gasoline.

[wk_end]

That's probably OK when the poorest workers are making the difference ten times over per hour.

[debtta]

Why would you expect fries to cost the same in California as in much poorer states (most of them)?

[bradlys]

Have you seen how fries are made at McDonald’s? There’s nearly zero labor involved. It’s nearly automated. You’re paying that price cause that’s what the market will bear and McDonald’s needs to see profits go up.

[almostgotcaught]

In-n-out fries are 2.45 (and a burger is 4$).

[bix6]

Do you know why in n out is so cheap still? It seems like all the other fast food jumped up.

[almostgotcaught]

the answer is staring you in the face and you still can't see it. let me give you a hint: it's also the reason arizone ice tea is still $.99

[jasondigitized]

The minimum wage needing to be $30 is just math unless you believe people shouldn't be able to live in America.

[enaaem]

Price distortions are bad because the market might not react correctly to it. But if there are too many restrictions to build housing anyway, you might as well ease the pain for social harmony.

[debtta]

I mean, if 50% of the population vote for something, arguably it is middle of the road.

[dboreham]

The lowest I've seen for low end jobs recently in Montana is $25/hr so $30 in NYC seems entirely reasonable.

[DANmode]

What part?

(McDonald’s is still $17 an hour in Billings.)

[dboreham]

Livingston

[Izikiel43]

> wants to defund the police

Ask Seattle how well that turned out

[pkulak]

Why? They didn’t defund their police.

[Izikiel43]

They tried, lots of people left, then backpedaled, and it's still not what it used to be.

[Kephael]

Seattle upset their police force and made them quit, they then had to pay overtime to fewer remaining officers which increased their spending.

[mcdonje]

"made them quit"

That's some editorializing

[whoooboyy]

Seattle has largely increased police funding, dramatically? For a dept under a consent decree until recently.

The mayor also capped non police crisis response teams to 24 people. Total. For the city. 24.

Seattle has done everything except defund the police, lol

[Izikiel43]

Those are recent measures. They had to increase funding because they decreased it, and shit hit the fan, and they are trying to hire people back.

[Taek]

It's not clear to me why a multigenerational dynasty specifically is a bad thing? Presumably the kids can learn from the parents, get connected, etc.

Also, Mamdani's policies are incredibly controversial, that's why it's such big news. Lots of people predicting that Mamdani's criminal policies, economic policies, and lack of experienced staffers will lead the city to dark days.

[JumpCrisscross]

> not clear to me why a multigenerational dynasty specifically is a bad thing?

Aristocracies are more stable but less efficient. That creates an incentive for corruption when growth inevitably stalls. Which leads to catastrophic instability.

[terminalshort]

There is minimal incentive for corruption in a hereditary aristocracy. Status is determined by birthright rather than accumulation of money. And if you are a lord and do need money, you have the power to tax it legally anyway. So what incentive is there to make or take a bribe? It won't change who your parents are.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Status is determined by birthright rather than accumulation of money. And if you are a lord and do need money, you have the power to tax it legally anyway

Lords being unconcerned with—and constrained by—wealth characterises all (EDIT: none of the) non-market societies that I know of. In part because basic economics constrains the society as a whole, even if they’re ignorant of its principles.

[terminalshort]

Right. I'm not saying anything about economics not applying, only that the incentive for corruption is absent.

[JumpCrisscross]

Sorry, I managed to reverse my argument with a typo.

> only that the incentive for corruption is absent

What historic civilisation are you thinking of?

[TheCoelacanth]

Aristocracy itself is state sanctioned corruption. The law is made to privilege certain people above others instead of serving the common good.

[terminalshort]

Corruption has a meaning, and it's not "the law is unfair."

[TheCoelacanth]

"illegal, bad, or dishonest behaviour, especially by people in positions of power"[1]

"Corruption is the dishonest, fraudulent, or criminal use of entrusted authority or power for personal gain or other unlawful or unethical benefits."[2]

Every single aristocracy absolutely fits those definitions. The norm in every aristocracy is to disregard the law in favor of what benefits those in power and to apply the law unequally depending on the desires of rulers.

[1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/corrupti...

[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/corruption

[ceejayoz]

This is so deeply wrong on so many levels I'm rather fascinated by it.

[nobody9999]

>Mamdani's policies are incredibly controversial, that's why it's such big news.

Which policies are "incredibly controversial?" And be specific.

Here'a a direct link to his platform for your reference"

https://www.zohranfornyc.com/platform

No rush. I'll wait.

[Taek]

His policies around being soft on crime (do you know what NYC was like in the 90's? It's not some distant history), the free bus fare, the city owned grocery stores, the rent control, are all policies that many feel threaten the economic viability and safety of the city.

If you don't think any of those policies are contentious, you are living in a bubble and greatly disconnected from huge portions of the population.

[eesmith]

You mean the 1990s which brought us "broken windows" policing and the frequent use of racist stop-and-frisk? When I visited Queens 15 years ago, what worried me most was the chance of interacting with cops on a power-trip.

The 1990s when NYPD cops Sean Carroll, Richard Murphy, Edward McMellon, and Kenneth Boss shot Amadou Diallo? When NYPD cop Justin Volpe sodomized Abner Louima with a broken broom handle? When NYPD cop Francis X. Livoti choked Anthony Baez for accidentally hitting a police car with a football?

If you don't think the history of being hard on crime is contentious, you are living in a bubble and greatly disconnected from huge portions of the population.

Other places have free public transport (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_public_transport). How has that threatened the economic viability and safety of those places?

And isn't it funny how the people who complain the most about free public transport have a large overlap with the people who didn't want congestion charges but instead wanted free access to city streets for their multi-ton private vehicles?

How could city owned grocery stores threaten the economic viability and safety of NYC? The only way that makes sense to me is if the economics of NYC depended on having a working class which is always on the edge of food insecurity. Were that the case, the economics structure of NYC must change, yes?

Since homeless shelters threaten the economic viability of hotels and rental companies, and libraries threaten the economic viability of bookstores, I suppose we should get rid of those too.

[nobody9999]

>(do you know what NYC was like in the 90's? It's not some distant history)

I do. And today is light years better than it was in the 90s. In fact, there were crack dealers on my corner in the 90s. They're not there any more. Or on 95th street and Amsterdam.

And there aren't any hookers on 90th street and Broadway or 58th and Sixth like there were in the 80s.

And I didn't know Verdi Park was called "Verdi Park" back then either. I just thought they called it "needle park" because it was kind of shaped like a needle. Silly me.

Or the side streets between 38th and 42nd streets from 10th Avenue to the West Side Highway literally covered in hundreds/thousands of used condoms every morning

And the 80s were much, much worse than the 90s. And don't even get me started on the 1970s, when there were street gangs every few blocks.

Oh, and back then (not much change AFAICT), the cops were just the biggest and best-armed gang.

Oh, I'm sorry haven't you lived in NYC for nearly 60 years too?

Soft on crime because Mamdani wants to send non-cops to help people having mental episodes? Soft on crime because he wants to enforce the law and close Rikers?

Free buses? Really? that's not exactly going to break the bank. And even so, the MTA needs to approve that -- and the MTA is controlled by the Governor, not the Mayor.

Five grocery stores in areas which aren't served by private ones? How exactly is that going to threaten[0] (perhaps USD$10 million to acquire space and set them all up, then presumably it can cover its costs from, you know, selling groceries -- or even USD$2.5 million in subsidies) the economic viability of NYC which has a budget of USD$116 Billion[1]?

Crime is down at levels not seen since the early 1960s (before I was born -- that's relevant because I've lived in, with the exception of a year here, six months, three months elsewhere, etc. in NYC my whole life) and crime is at its lowest in all that time. Free buses are a few tens of millions and a few grocery stores are chump change[2] in NYC.

>If you don't think any of those policies are contentious, you are living in a bubble and greatly disconnected from huge portions of the population.

I take issue with that characterization. How long have you lived in NYC?

[0] https://pos.toasttab.com/blog/on-the-line/cost-to-open-a-sup...

[1] https://www.nydailynews.com/2025/06/30/nyc-council-passes-11...

[2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chump%20change

Edit: Fixed prose/punctuation.

[Izkata]

Good point, I agree Mamdani's soft-on-crime policies are bad. Really wouldn't want to go back to the era you're describing.

[nobody9999]

>I agree Mamdani's soft-on-crime policies are bad.

which policies?

I really don't know what you're talking about.

I read through his platform[0] and I don't see anything that's "soft" on crime.

Please do enlighten me as I'm apparently quite confused.

[0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1a7ejjSZWWIAcxfcWnkYaqvnj...

[ComplexSystems]

I don't feel that you're going to get a lot of engagement with this attitude. It doesn't come off like a good-faith effort to have an honest intellectual conversation, which is what this forum is about.

There are clearly policies on that page that break from the NYC status quo (like freezing the rent). Perhaps you are interested in explaining to us why you think these are economically sound ideas, rather than insisting they aren't controversial?

[eesmith]

> NYC status quo (like freezing the rent).

The platform page points out how the status quo was recently broken: "Eric Adams has taken every opportunity to squeeze tenants, with his hand-picked appointees to the Rent Guidelines Board jacking up rents on stabilized apartments by 12.6% (and counting)–the most since a Republican ran City Hall."

Sure sounds like Adams made a controversial change to the status quo to me.

The position is "As Mayor, Zohran will immediately freeze the rent for all stabilized tenants".

I read that as want to return to status quo ante Adams.

[cosmicgadget]

There is a lot of daylight between "break from the status quo" and "incredibly controversial". I am not getting much from either of you.

[nobody9999]

>There are clearly policies on that page that break from the NYC status quo (like freezing the rent). Perhaps you are interested in explaining to us why you think these are economically sound ideas, rather than insisting they aren't controversial?

You mean like the rent freeze[0] in 2020/2021 (and apparently in 2014-2016[1], although I don't recall that and am too lazy to check my old leases) on the very same apartments that Mamdani is proposing the same?

>I don't feel that you're going to get a lot of engagement with this attitude. It doesn't come off like a good-faith effort to have an honest intellectual conversation, which is what this forum is about.

Really? Funny that. As a resident of NYC, I reviewed the policies proposed by Mamdani and none of them seem all that controversial (or even all that much in the way of veering from the status quo). I will say that the whole public grocery stores seems a little over the top, but market forces haven't eliminated food deserts in many lower income neighborhoods. As such, why is it bad to try such a thing?

GP called Mamdani's policy proposals "incredibly controversial." I haven't seen even one such policy. As such, I asked for an example of such a "controversial" policy to help me understand where GP was coming from and provided a comprehensive list of Mamdani's policy proposals as an aid to identifying such policies.

I explicitly asked for specific proposals so we could discuss why (or why not) they might be "controversial."

How is that a bad "attitude"?

[0] https://hcr.ny.gov/system/files/documents/2025/07/fact-sheet...

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45819654

Edit: Fixed prose.

[Spivak]

I really don't get the doom and gloom on this, NYC now has a mayor that might inadvertently fuck over the city trying to do right by working class folks instead of a mayor who does it as a matter of course. Forget policy disagreements, just the fact that we have a successful politician any side of the isle that is not currently gargling the balls of rich people and actually has some principles is so refreshing.

You are demand better of your government than "the blatant corruption you've learned to live with."

[lisbbb]

I'm against any and all political dynasties. They fly in the face of what representative government should be about. We have many people qualified to become political leaders but they never get the chance due to how the system operates.

I'm not sure NYC knows what it is getting into with this guy, but yeah, the alternatives were lousy. Sliwa? The whole Guardian Angels thing was one hell of a marketing job, I'll say that. Does anyone really believe a bunch of former gang thugs with some martial arts training accomplished very much?

The Cuomo family is corrupt to the core. Terrible for NY State.

Good luck, NYC. You're gonna need it!

[dmbche]

You want your elected officials to "keep connections" accross generations?

You also think New York can't find someone that's at least as competent as someone in a multigenerational dynasty?

[Taek]

Based on what I saw in the debates, I'm sure there are lots of people in NYC more capable than anyone on the ballet.

But yes, someone with connections is going to be more operationally effective than someone without them. If the leader isn't themselves well connected, they should at least have close advisors who do.

[kelnos]

> It's not clear to me why a multigenerational dynasty specifically is a bad thing?

Because they're undemocratic.

Concentrating political capital within a family means raises barriers to entry. People with new -- possibly better -- ideas don't get a meaningful chance to see those ideas implemented.

These sorts of setups destroy the idea that politics and elections can be a meritocracy, but instead are determined by birthright. You end up with aristocracies populated by the extended family, friends, and business partners of the family in power.

You also get stagnation. You're less likely to see other points of view represented in the political process, and that affects outcomes.

[Taek]

It's a tradeoff between new ideas and operational effectiveness. Yes, there are benefits to rotating out a dynasty, but there are also benefits to keeping one.

A dynasty is only undemocratic if people aren't voting for them. If they are winning elections, it's still a democracy.