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.
We've become a one party system here in NYC. That should be much more alarming than political opposition.
We are a one party system, it's the same party running the country. When it matters it's only the business and the rich that gets their wishes taken cared of.
Trump wanted the wall but the big businesses don't want it.
Obama wanted the wall reinforced and Congress rejected it. That was supported by Senator Clinton and the Republican Congress rejected it.
Bill Clinton wanted to build a bigger wall and it was also rejected even by his own party.
We the people voted who we wanted for President but they are powerless against the one party that controls congress and the house.
Your 45 year cycle was the great depression and the freefall of urban cities in the US in the 70s though really started since at least the 50s and running through to the early 90s in NYC though a decade or so longer in some of the other urban cities. The first one was obviously a national economic downturn. The latter was throughout even in the south and the west. The stats for those don’t look as bad for the most part because those cities often had much smaller urban cores and often physically included massive amounts of then undeveloped land that was suburbia but in, or eventally in through annexation, the city boundaries.
9/11 is an example of very localized damage though with larger ramifications. The great depression and large scale urban renewal and suburbanization policies were very much national.
There’s definitely very fair criticisms of the mayor and the governor both of whom are at the very least mediocre. However, the preparedness for an economic downturn which is what the couple of quotes in the article mention as the occasion where NYC will be faced with significant issues is almost certainly going to be an issue for cities throughout the US.
I am cautiously hoping that something was learned from NYC in the 1970s and from Detroit. Tax collections are going to be bad this year... one possibility is Detroit redux, but the other possibility is fiscal tightening like in CA (ie, killing of welfare programs that cannot be funded - sorry, no more money). The second possibility could actually lead to a better quality of life in the city, as the welfare class would move on (seeing that there are no handouts like before), and the middle class (which actually pays taxes)could move to affordable homes. If you make NYC suitable for the middle class again, you get the same tax base that Western Europe has. A large middle class CAN actually fund some of the NY social fantasies that are impossible with a large welfare class.
And you have some politicians wanting to take on the debt of the MTA?
That’s why Cuomo and De Blasio was crying for Amazon to come, they love spending and need more money to spend.
And no we aren’t heading backs to 1970s NYC, there is too much wealth concentrated here now. If anything De Blasio or the next mayor during a recession will just have to make crazy cuts to the pet projects they love. So no more or limited one shot deals, lawyers for all tenants, no healthcare for all, etc. these social programs will be the first to go. Raising taxes during a recession will never happen
If you believe recessions will get rid of one shot deals or other social spending I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
If you believe recessions will get rid of one shot deals or other social spending I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
More comments from the peanut gallery all the way from sunny Spain.
For your information, and if the past is any guide, then yes all those social benefits are the first things city cuts when finances hit rough patches.
It just makes sense when having to make decisions about what to cut out of a budget you get rid of the easiest things first. Far quicker and easier to remove or cut back social benefits than begin laying off NYC employees.
Looking for savings while still increasing spending in part to keep this charade of NYC being "the most fairest city in the country". By that he means playing at Robin Hood; taking from those that have and giving to them that don't.
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.
