Are DeBlasio Programs About "Feel-Good" or Solid Accomplishment? (apartments, felons)

[jbgusa]

Two recent headline articles,ThriveNYC was a mismanaged mess from the beginning (link) and With opaque budget and elusive metrics, $850M ThriveNYC program attempts a reset (link) highlight a serious problem with liberal or progressive policies. The intentions are always good; ThriveNYC's goal, as I understand it is to promote mental health in stressful and difficult times. Always laudable.

The problems are manyfold:

1. How do you measure results?
2. How do you measure costs against benefits?
3. How do you decide what programs to institute?

Those are only some of the many problems with open-ended programs. There is no way to measure if they work. There is no way to ensure that the programs are not corrupt, other than drowning them in bookkeeping. I believe that one must decide what they want to accomplish and how they're setting out on a mission, than just throwing money around.

[Shizzles]

/\ Most NYC politics IMHO seems to either be 1) purely ideological, 2) unabashed racial/ethnic pandering, 3) just pandering in general...And note, this includes the few right-wing figures in the area as well, not just left.

I find there's a large contingent of very left wing folks whose policies are simply liberal for liberal sake rather than genuinely thought out positions based on a realistic sense of what works. Examples:

Rikers:
Yes, Rikers is a horror show and a symbol of everything that's wrong with mass incarceration. Here's the rub: any jail we build anywhere else will soon be just as bad. The issue is a system where violent felons go free because we need to make sure someone locked up over a J stays there because of Rockefeller. Fix the system, rebuild Rikers to be a smaller, more tightly controlled facility. But that doesn't appease the activists.

Amazon:
Yes, it's over and we all should just let it go, but to kick a company promising 50k upper middle class jobs in the groin because they were going to receive a 10% tax break is absurd. They can just go to Texas which has no business taxes (read: 100% tax break) and contribute massively to climate change since we know virtually 0% of Texas is walkable or urban in any way. Oh, and it was nice seeing lily white hipsters telling the working class, many of color, longtimers of LIC to sit down when people mentioned about the jobs angle. Diversity for the win.


Housing:
The never ending talk of "affordable housing" (which is becoming the most played out issue in NYC) is another rodeo. Between lottery apartments for those earning 120K, people screaming down 50% affordable developments as "ethnic cleansing", protesting new Target stores because they might induce "displacement" there's simply not enough space to describe how ridiculous this issue has become.

[jbgusa]

Originally Posted by Shizzles

/\ Most NYC politics IMHO seems to either be 1) purely ideological, 2) unabashed racial/ethnic pandering, 3) just pandering in general...And note, this includes the few right-wing figures in the area as well, not just left.

You expressed my opinion better than I did or could have. The best answer you will get by some of these people is:

1. We have to do something;
2. We have to start somewhere;
3. You must be a racist; and/or
4. You must support Trump.

[fatsquirrel]

Originally Posted by Shizzles

/\ Most NYC politics IMHO seems to either be 1) purely ideological, 2) unabashed racial/ethnic pandering, 3) just pandering in general...And note, this includes the few right-wing figures in the area as well, not just left.

I find there's a large contingent of very left wing folks whose policies are simply liberal for liberal sake rather than genuinely thought out positions based on a realistic sense of what works. Examples:

Rikers:
Yes, Rikers is a horror show and a symbol of everything that's wrong with mass incarceration. Here's the rub: any jail we build anywhere else will soon be just as bad. The issue is a system where violent felons go free because we need to make sure someone locked up over a J stays there because of Rockefeller. Fix the system, rebuild Rikers to be a smaller, more tightly controlled facility. But that doesn't appease the activists.

Amazon:
Yes, it's over and we all should just let it go, but to kick a company promising 50k upper middle class jobs in the groin because they were going to receive a 10% tax break is absurd. They can just go to Texas which has no business taxes (read: 100% tax break) and contribute massively to climate change since we know virtually 0% of Texas is walkable or urban in any way. Oh, and it was nice seeing lily white hipsters telling the working class, many of color, longtimers of LIC to sit down when people mentioned about the jobs angle. Diversity for the win.


Housing:
The never ending talk of "affordable housing" (which is becoming the most played out issue in NYC) is another rodeo. Between lottery apartments for those earning 120K, people screaming down 50% affordable developments as "ethnic cleansing", protesting new Target stores because they might induce "displacement" there's simply not enough space to describe how ridiculous this issue has become.

A lot of these left wing people are not actually from NYC or they don't have public policy experience.

[Banbuk77]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

Two recent headline articles,ThriveNYC was a mismanaged mess from the beginning (link) and With opaque budget and elusive metrics, $850M ThriveNYC program attempts a reset (link) highlight a serious problem with liberal or progressive policies. The intentions are always good; ThriveNYC's goal, as I understand it is to promote mental health in stressful and difficult times. Always laudable.

The problems are manyfold:

1. How do you measure results?
2. How do you measure costs against benefits?
3. How do you decide what programs to institute?

Those are only some of the many problems with open-ended programs. There is no way to measure if they work. There is no way to ensure that the programs are not corrupt, other than drowning them in bookkeeping. I believe that one must decide what they want to accomplish and how they're setting out on a mission, than just throwing money around.

You forgot question #4: at which point after the results are complete opposite of what you expected you admit you were wrong. And the answer for progressively gifted will be 'never'.

Like he is spending billions to reduce number of homeless by giving them apartments. But since he started fighting - the number of homeless doubled. But instead of trying to figure why the result is an opposite, he is doubling down. After all, it is always lack of funds. If we spend $1 billion a year to reduce number of homeless and that number doubles - let's spend $2 billion and everything will be great.

Same with schools. It is always lack of funds even though NYC spends 50-100% more on a student than in other places and has nothing to show for it. But for progressives, if only we could spend more, if we only hire more administrators and raise teachers' salaries - the students would magically perform much better.
But to explore an idea that no amount of money would fix something if the problem is somewhere else - would mean to admit you were wrong. But that is never going to happen because progressives can never be wrong by definition.

[jbgusa]

Originally Posted by Banbuk77

You forgot question #4: at which point after the results are complete opposite of what you expected you admit you were wrong. And the answer for progressively gifted will be 'never'.

Like he is spending billions to reduce number of homeless by giving them apartments. But since he started fighting - the number of homeless doubled. But instead of trying to figure why the result is an opposite, he is doubling down. After all, it is always lack of funds. If we spend $1 billion a year to reduce number of homeless and that number doubles - let's spend $2 billion and everything will be great.

Same with schools. It is always lack of funds even though NYC spends 50-100% more on a student than in other places and has nothing to show for it. But for progressives, if only we could spend more, if we only hire more administrators and raise teachers' salaries - the students would magically perform much better.
But to explore an idea that no amount of money would fix something if the problem is somewhere else - would mean to admit you were wrong. But that is never going to happen because progressives can never be wrong by definition.

As it always is. They want the money without having to plan for its spending or account for its results.

[Dangerous-Boy]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

As it always is. They want the money without having to plan for its spending or account for its results.

^this


deblasio programs are like trump tweets

[nybklyn]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

You expressed my opinion better than I did or could have. The best answer you will get by some of these people is:

1. We have to do something;
2. We have to start somewhere;
3. You must be a racist; and/or
4. You must support Trump.

I agreed, but so what. First, all politicians are basically throwing money on their campaign to get elected. Second, is all about who they know. As long as you know someone powerful up there, they will get you in one way or the other. Current president is the best example. Lastly, as long as you have the union leaders on your side, you are good.

[OyCrumbler]

Mostly the former and probably a little bit of the latter though the little bit of the latter were often what took the most effort such as the pre-K stuff he was pushing.