Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It won't be long before everybody realized how good we had it under Bloomberg and Rudy. And even David Dinkins, who was a liberal and not a very effective mayor, never bashed the rich like this clown progressive we have in office now. You want super-wealthy people living in New York City, not Florida.
Classic NY Post research and investigative journalism:
"One friend says 10 wealthy people have told him they are leaving "
Don't kid yourself. It will happen. He is at war with the super wealthy, and thinks it is their fault that there are poor people in New York City. Like they are stealing from the poor. He hates those condos being built on 57th Street and hates the people that will live in them.
The reason there are so many poor in NYC because of the large number of single mothers with children, and the constant surge of unskilled immigrants (legal and illegal), who would be much better off immigrating to low cost cities where you can rent a 2-bedroom apartment for under $600.
If all the billionaires left NYC, we would have less "income inequality" (his obsession), but the city would be much worse off.
Remember the quote from Karl Marx: "The only way to destroy capitalism is by taxes, taxes and more taxes." They are doing just that. What is going to happen when the number of non-working people outnumbers the people who are working?
Remember the quote from Karl Marx: "The only way to destroy capitalism is by taxes, taxes and more taxes." They are doing just that. What is going to happen when the number of non-working people outnumbers the people who are working?
The wealthy don't need NY. NY was attractive to them because of it's perceived value in real estate, and the ability to network with the people they need (likely other wealthy people.) But these people have the resources to live, and take their businesses anywhere. They don't even have to go very far, still have the benefits of being near NY, and not have to put up with NYC's crap.
Notice how the hub of the hedge fund industry is really Stamford, not so much Manhattan any more? Why is this? Maybe CT's cheaper taxes? And they can still be in Manhattan for a meeting in 45 minutes if they need to be.
The wealthy don't need NY. NY was attractive to them because of it's perceived value in real estate, and the ability to network with the people they need (likely other wealthy people.) But these people have the resources to live, and take their businesses anywhere. They don't even have to go very far, still have the benefits of being near NY, and not have to put up with NYC's crap.
Notice how the hub of the hedge fund industry is really Stamford, not so much Manhattan any more? Why is this? Maybe CT's cheaper taxes? And they can still be in Manhattan for a meeting in 45 minutes if they need to be.
De Blasio probably could not tell you what a hedge fund does (other than being responsible for income inequality), and probably has no clue about the Greenwich and Stamford real estate markets. He is totally clueless regarding how cities and regions compete.
I recently saw a post somewhere in which the liberal Democratic mayor of Jersey City stated that he would never raise taxes there. That man understands reality.
De Blasio probably could not tell you what a hedge fund does (other than being responsible for income inequality), and probably has no clue about the Greenwich and Stamford real estate markets. He is totally clueless regarding how cities and regions compete.
Most liberals don't.
I'm more worried about how deep his liberal re-engineering of the school system will go. We're starting to talk about private schools, which will obviously be a financial burden for us, because we're pretty certain we don't want him and his communist minions involved with our children in anyway whatsoever. If I have to sacrifice financially to achieve that, I will. That's what real parents do, take responsibility.
I'm more worried about how deep his liberal re-engineering of the school system will go. We're starting to talk about private schools, which will obviously be a financial burden for us, because we're pretty certain we don't want him and his communist minions involved with our children in anyway whatsoever. If I have to sacrifice financially to achieve that, I will. That's what real parents do, take responsibility.
He just pulled the plug on three new Charter Schools. And I bet it was done solely for ideological reasons, and nothing to do with a better education for the "have nots" whom he claims to care about.
Charter School teachers are not members of the UFT. 'Ya think that might have had something to do with his decision?
I'm not sure I really care. The "wealthy" have made this place partly uninhabitable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
