“Threatens.” Oh, they mean “proposes as an alternative.”
Fuckin’ NYT.
Scale the property tax exponentially based on the valuation of the property. Make sure the wealthy land owners pay more. Much, much more.
Its so funny the NYT has like half a dozen quotes about people opposed to the tax hikes but not a single one has presented a real idea for alternatives.
NYC has some of the highest taxes in the country. The alternative is less taxes.
The alternative is less taxes for most, and more taxes for few.
The problem is that all those services that people like and rely on? They cost money. Inflation and dipshit tariffs are eating into everything, so new revenue is required.
How are you gonna do less taxes when your guy left office with a 12b shortfall? My understanding is that NYC services are already running pretty lean as it is. What are you gonna cut?
“We are either going to get the money from the fat cats or from you. Your choice.”. I’m waiting on pins and needles to see where the money comes from.
I mean property taxes and wealth taxes are essentially the same thing.
Only if the wealthy have their money invested in real estate, right? If they’re invested in stocks and hedge funds and such, then a property tax increase isn’t going to cost them as much as a straight up wealth tax.
Both of those hit the fat cats
Why not both?
You use the carrot or the stick. Using both at the same time makes no sense.
Don’t use a carrot and stick.
Because a property tax hike only hurts the middle class
What the fuck is a “middle class?” We don’t have one of those anymore.
Like most taxes it’s possible to do a progressive property tax, where the more your properties are collectively worth the higher rate of tax you pay. This doesn’t sound like what is being proposed here, but it is very-much possible and hopefully it gets changed before it’s passed.
Done right this will leave owner/occupiers in the same state they are in now, mildly reduce the profitability of small time landlords and make large scale landlords financial nonsense viable forcing them to sell.
The actual risk is that because it lowers house prices by artificially reducing the demand it won’t encourage housebuilding which is the only real solution when more people want or need to live in a place than there is housing.
That said, I am optimistic this increases supply enough by forcing sales of under occupied properties to offset the reduction in built supply.
I’m pretty sure property taxes aren’t progressive and I’m baffled as to why.
Make it so like the first 100k is taxed low, and then ramp up so people with millions of property pay through the nose.
I’m considered middle class despite being something like in the top 10% of earners in the US and I don’t own any property. I don’t know if I could afford to own property with their current prices. I’m not certain property taxes hit the middle class as much as they might have back when my parents were in their prime. Of course it still hits a percentage of the middle class, but I’m suggesting that percentage is shrinking and smaller than the revenue it would generate from the rich.
Are there middle class property owners in New York city?
I feel like middle class would all be renters there and upper class wealthy the only actual owners.
I know a couple people here who own apartments. Median income here I think is like $115k. None of them are much more than that.
Just like every other cost related to owning and maintaining a rental: property taxes get passed down to renters.
Do you suppose a wealth tax wouldn’t also be passed on to renters? Should we just not tax the rich at all since they’ll just pass the cost on to their tenants?
^ this. This is the NYC situation
You have fallen for propaganda, this simply isn’t true.
Please enlighten me how a property tax increase doesn’t hurt the middle and lower class disproportionately. I’d love to hear this.
Someone replied fifty minutes ago with an answer. You have no interest in learning why you’re wrong, stop pretending to give a shit.
For everyone else, in NYC the middle class disproportionately rents. It is the wealthy who own.
the middle class disproportionately rents. It is the wealthy who own.
Just like every other cost related to owning and maintaining a rental: property taxes get passed down to renters.
This tax hike disproportionately affects middle and lower class individuals.
If the landlords could charge more, they’d already be doing it.
No, this is just what the landlords say, like how they say raising wages would impact jobs. It’s just not true. Landlords already charge the maximum people are willing and able to pay, they can’t really pass those costs on. Just like how in fact companies hire based on how many employees they need to fulfil their contracts, and it’s only affected marginally by the wages.
When a cost goes up for all owners at once, this leads to everyone raising rent prices at the same time. There is no opportunity for a renter to jump ship to a cheaper property, they all went up. The maximum changed.
Yes, this will price out many people from being able to afford housing.
Property tax is based on property values. Rich people have more valuable properties. Of the taxes we actually have, it’s one of the most progressive as it actually hits wealthy people more.
This is how you do it when you’re serious about achieving what you promise for your constituents. Use your tools as needed, demand cooperation, when you don’t get it, use your tools as leverage. Even if you fail, people see you did what you could and then they’re ready to punish whoever stood in your way at the ballot box. This is why the oligarch class is so afraid of Mamdani who’s just a mayor.
I’m a NYC resident, and I pay property taxes. If this is the stick that will (hopefully) get us the carrot of a wealth tax, I’m all for it. If property taxes end up going up, and we can use it to make the city better with the services Mamdani wants to get going, well then let’s go. I will figure out how to pay the additional taxes somehow. With that said, let this be a bargaining chip. Working with the rest of NYC’s political class is like a bunch of toddlers. The best thing you can do is give them two options, one you want (which they won’t like) and one you don’t want (which they really won’t like). And make them pick. So they feel like they have agency, it’s their decision, don’tchaknow?
Don tchak now
Don Tchak never! The dude is completely corrupt, and I hear he has some very nasty sexual proclivities.
It’s a little bit misleading to refer to as any mayor of New York City as “just a mayor“.
Second largest city in north america?
It’s just a tiny little financial capitol of the world with a measley population of only 8.4 million people.
Barely as large as Austria
And what did Austria ever achieve???
If NYC was a state it would be between the 11th and 12th most populous state.
And California is the world’s 4th largest economy, behind only the entire rest of the United States, China, and Germany. New York State would be 8th.
The Democratic states and cities are economic and sociopolitical leaders for a reason. Don’t listen to the bullshit calling them socialist hellholes. The evidence suggests that taking care of your people (and maybe even having illegal immigrants too gasp or better yet legal immigrants) is actually an economically sound, and maybe even economically preferable strategy overall.
Illegal immigrants are one of the strongest boosters of the economy, since they are a source of cheap skilled labor. You’d have to be totally stupid to intentionally throw away that advantage.
I agree that it would be better to make them legal however. I believe in free movement and commerce.
I agree that it would be better to make them legal however. I believe in free movement and commerce.
100% Nobody wants to be in this situation.
The system simply doesn’t allow for people to enter ‘in the right way’, as far as the vast majority of non-rich people around the world are concerned the US Border is closed unless you win a literal lottery.
We clearly need these people and benefit from their presence both economically and culturally. Instead of creating an immigration system that reflects that reality, we have one that makes them live in the shadows and deal with exploitation because they cannot access normal public services, including the police, for fear of being arrested (possibly violently) and thrown in detention for an unspecified amount of time.
It has to be different, and not in the ways that these white nationalists cosplaying as law enforcement are envisioning.
I love when people say the us should get rid of CA. Yeah let’s just throw away the worlds 4th largest economy because you’re anti woke 🙄
You can also casually remind people that more Republicans live in California than Texas, which usually makes their head explode. It’s an enormous state, with a huge economy, with tons and tons of people.
People like that are willing to do or say anything in order to get validation for their shitty beliefs
I mean everyone has something they value more than economics… For some, those are bad values, but it’s not unique.
The population of NYC is larger than the combined population of the smallest 28 countries in the world.
Uh doesn’t this just inflict pain on the middle class if it ends up passing?
Most people dont make over 1,000,000 a year. A millionaires tax, like the one passed in Washington state, only taxes 9.9% of every dollar OVER ONE MILLION. The first million has the same tax rate as everyone else.
They still keep 90.1% of every dollar over one million. It is not as if it is forfeit. They will still be making a shit ton of money.
Talking about the property tax, not the wealth tax. And even though it’s lower than other parts of the country, a third of NYC denizens own their homes, so a property tax increase seems like it’d have a lot of collateral effects on the not-so-wealthy.
I feel you there. Washington state has no income tax, so there are so many levers we can pull to raise revenue. Property tax is one of the big ones. Every time I get a ballot to vote on, there is some new levy they want to add. I generally vote yes, because I want schools to be funded and parks taken care of, but it does get to a point where our tax system is regressive.
Wealth taxes make sense. Those who can afford to pay a small amount more should step up. Mamdani’s plan of raising taxes on wealthy New Yorkers by -2%- is even less than what was passed in Washington state.
Does the middle class own property in New York at all? I thought most just rent apartments.
NYC is 5 boroughs a lot of it is single family or 2 family housing.
And you think land lords won’t pass increased property taxes on to their tenants?
I don’t live in NYC so I won’t give an opinion on this but landlords won’t just eat increased taxes.
No, in a market like NYC rents are already the maximum that the market can bear, and a lower percentage of property prices than elsewhere. Landlords in fact will eat at least part of the increased taxes because the only other option is to not rent the property. That’s exactly why they’re so upset about it.
Property taxes are paid by the renters. Landlords don’t have any money other than rent. This is a tax on tenants with extra steps
Landlords don’t have any money other than rent. This is a tax on tenants with extra steps
The landlords that this is targeted against are not the slightly rich guy who owns an apartment building, it’s people like Citadel LLC who has nearly $70 Billion dollars of assets under management, a large portion of which are rental properties.
Those landlords have the money to pay the taxes. They own much more expensive properties, many of which are held empty and are limited in how much they can raise their prices indirectly, due to them already charging as much as the market will bear and also directly by Mamdani freezing rents.
In addition, many wealthy people in NYC own expensive housing (including Trump) that they use and do not rent.
Better pass a rent freeze first or that property tax increase will just get passed on to the people who can afford it least.
Better pass a rent freeze first
Renters are already fucked in NYC. Stop making their lives worse with proven failures like rent control.
Rent control works in specific applications. First, it must be short term as a response to market shocks (like a sudden tax increase). It also must have a graduated taper off period where prices are allowed to gradually increase to meet the market rate. With the dramatic increase in work-from-home, office spaces are going empty. This creates an opportunity to counteract the usual reduction in the quantity of rental units that comes with rent freeze. Reductions of red tape and streamlining conversion of office spaces into apartments would stabilize or even increase the number of rental units.
The entire point is that there needs to be a comprehensive strategy, not just a simple tax.
He’s working on it. Link
Rent freezes make landlords only do the bare minimum maintenance required by the law since they can’t increase rents when doing any remodelling.
Another way of looking at this is landlords won’t be able to fancy up units and jack up prices which push out low income renters. Also, if landlords can’t make a profit, they will sell which will allow more people to buy rather than be forced to rent. This does decrease the number of rental units in the future which could drive up prices, but it could be combined with a plan to renovate office spaces into apartments to counteract this.
Lmao how many properties do you own?
Honey landlords already do the bare minimum.
While I wholeheartedly agree with the goal, we should keep in mind that this is still executive overreach and that one single person shouldn’t get to decide. Of course, the whole system needs a better approach to really implement the constituents’ wishes, but no kings goes at all levels, not just the presidency.
I would push back and say that he’s trying to implement the mandate he got elected on using the levers he has. In an ideal system the legislature should set the boundaries but that isn’t the US right now.
He’s required by law to balance the budget and has legal authority to do so by raising taxes.
If anything most his critics are proposing he simply disobey the laws by slashing lawful services or by operating at a shortfall.
I’m not criticizing his goals, not even the action itself, I am just pointing the approach to it.
No, oddly enough a mayor does in fact have the authority to increase or decrease property taxes.
He can also implement “special assessments” or “mansion taxes” o properties.
He does have limits on who he can tax, it looks like the state controls the taxation for homesteads. Im not certain he can raise taxes on people with one home that they are currently living in (that may require state approval).
I never said he doesn’t have the authority, I said that if what he wants is not in his power, the state legislature in this case, this approach is something people would decry if the opposite side of the spectrum did it (the approach itself, the content would anyways).
and that one single person shouldn’t get to decide
I doubt that he is bypassing any legislative process here. Hes just doing things that are legally within his power.
Oh, I’m not saying he is doing anything outside of his powers, I’m just saying that legislating by executive order is not tactic that should be encouraged.
Yeah executive orders are a stupid concept, but is it even the case here. I dont see anything about it in the article, it just says “Mayor Zohran Mamdani on Tuesday proposed to raise property tax rates in New York City by nearly 10 percent”. It just sounds like a proposal that is still undergoing evaluation, not an order.
Communism is fun until there is no more someone else’s money for free handouts.
I adapted it but it’s still valid I guess.
Expect companies to flee the state just as happened in LA.
Then start taking their property and give it to the community of people who are running it anyways.
What about when there is no more someone else’s property left to “give to the community”?
Then the community has less burdens and it continues to build them as they always have for the rich.
You think you would just disappear because you can’t suck rich people’s dicks?
Where do you think those billionaires got their money?
spoiler
Its all Someone Else’s Money
New York as a whole has ridiculous taxes because of insane police budgets and corruption allowing stuff like ambulance companies charging the state 3K/trip for non-emergency weekly dialysis visits.
Which is weirdly similar to California which you’d think was a communist utopia the way rightwingers talk about it.
If I sell you a thing, it’s no longer your money, it’s my money. You get a thing that is now your thing.
Do you think billionaires got their money through their own labor?
Nah, you get temporary conditional privileges to use my thing. And I decide the price because I’m the only company that makes the thing because I’ve used all of my previous exploitation of you to buy out all of my competitors and buy your government.
Free market so good
Problem is by now, I don’t get that thing anymore. i get a freaking licence to use it for some time, and when you decide I don’t own that licence anymore you got my money and I have nothing
Only time will let us know what will happen.
Weakest disengage ever… You can do better!
Do you want to make any testable predictions, which would cause you to reevaluate your model if they don’t pass?
This isn’t communism and social programs are a net positive in the long run. California is doing fine.
Narrator: California was not doing fine.
I’m from California, leftists fucked up San Francisco
What leftist policy did San Francisco pass that fucked it up?
You’re not getting a real answer on that one, chief. Guy came to publicly lick boots and boat shoes.
nimbys fucked up san fransisco, so they can charge people 1-2k/month to live out of tents in their backyards
Lol a fucking mgtow 😂
I’m curious, what’s your definition of communism?
Read about the horseshoe theory and you will know it.
We’re asking what YOU define as communism.
I define it as something not much different than fascism. For me the main differences between these are the nationalist and globalist difference, fascism being national socialism and communism being globalist socialism.
I know the official definition of communism is just the owning of the means of production by the state which could be true but beside that there is always an elite of individuals which are in control and have a particular interest in controlling everyone else’s lives for the good of “the proletariat” but more for their own interests.
So national socialism is a more localized doctrine and globalist socialism is a more global doctrine.
an elite of individuals which are in control and have a particular interest in controlling everyone else’s live
Ask a lib to describe communism and they describe capitalism.
Slightly more insidious than that is the attempt to conflate ‘socialism’ with ‘national socialism’, i.e. the Nazis. Seemingly every five minutes someone tries to conflate the two despite being on opposite sides of the political spectrum, hence the bullshit pseudoscience that is “horseshoe theory”.
Libs: I just shit my pants. Both the communists and the nazis are trying to avoid me. That’s because they’re actually the same.
Expect companies to flee the state just as happened in LA.
There’s the door then! points toward New Jersey
