Log in
Affordability Crisis: All Democratic mayoral candidates agree that New York City is facing an affordability crisis.
High Cost of Living: The cost of living in NYC is significantly higher than the national average, particularly for housing and food.
Impact on Households: Rising costs have outpaced median income growth, resulting in approximately half of city households requiring assistance to meet basic needs.
Candidate Promises vs. Reality: While candidates propose various free programs, these initiatives would likely necessitate tax increases, further escalating the cost of living.
Government Spending: Current city and state budgets are substantial, suggesting the issue may stem from irresponsible spending rather than a lack of funds.
Call for Specifics: The author urges moderators to demand concrete details from candidates on how they plan to fund their proposed programs and who would bear the cost during upcoming debates.
If there is a single point of agreement among all the Democrats running for mayor, it’s that New York is too damn expensive.
They uniformly call it an “affordability crisis” and pledge to do something about it if elected.
They are largely correct — the cost of living in New York has become absurdly high.
Although part of the trend grew out of the inflation sparked by massive spending by federal, state and local governments during the COVID era, there is also a long history of Gotham being one of most expensive places in the nation to live.
A study shows that, in comparison to the national average, food prices in the five boroughs are about 22% higher, while housing is 278% more expensive.
Making ends meet
The United Way finds that basic costs for city households have risen twice as fast as the median income and estimates that about half of them need help from the government, friends or family just to make ends meet.
As Queens Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani recently told the New York Times, “There are far too many New Yorkers who do not know if they will be able to call themselves that next year, who do not know if they will be able to afford their rent, or their child care, their groceries, or even their MetroCard.”
True to his socialist affiliations, Mamdani is promising the longest list of freebies, but his rivals have all joined the spree.
Even Andrew Cuomo, often regarded as the most centrist of the bunch and the leader according to polls, is no shrinking violet in the giveaway games.
The candidates’ promises to address the problem sound very nice — until you realize that nearly everything they are offering would ultimately drive the sky-high cost of living even higher.
Already that burden is one of the top reasons why New York City and state lead America in losing residents to lower-cost jurisdictions.
Congestion pricing is the latest example of how and why the cost of living here keeps rising.
If the candidates all want to raise prices even higher, they should support a joint slogan: “Dear Voters, If you’re not broke yet, just wait.”
The problem is that government compassion doesn’t come cheap.
In fact, it’s outrageously expensive.
That’s certainly true in the case at hand.
The candidates’ “solutions” are just promises to give away more stuff to more people, such as free bus service, free child care, free this and free that.
It’s all wrapped in the language of compassion for the poor and working class.
But what the lefty Dems leave out of the conversation is an honest explanation about where the money would come from to pay for all their added goodies, and what the impact would be of an expanded redistribution scheme to deliver them.
Don’t be fooled by the lack of details.
That’s intentional because the numbers would be frightening.
Take away to give away
But hiding the truth doesn’t change the fact that because City Hall can’t print money, it will first have to take more from residents and businesses if it is going to give away more.
Consider the obvious impact on businesses.
If they are taxed more, most will make up for it by raising prices on their customers, cutting the pay of their workers or reducing the number of workers.
When a business goes broke, the city gets no taxes and the workers have no income.
Because higher taxes always impose a trickle-down cost on some people, a similar outcome is true if the government raises income taxes on individuals, sales taxes or property taxes.
Somebody somewhere along the line is going to feel the pinch of every added dollar the city takes to give away to someone it declares more deserving.
For those forced to pay more, the “solution” to the problem means their cost of living is going to get even higher.
That’s why the candidates’ plans need to be seen in light of the current budget.
As it stands, City Hall will raise and spend a whopping $112.4 billion this year — nearly
as much as the entire state of Florida.
as much as the entire state of Florida.
New York state, meanwhile, will raise and spend $255 billion, with much of that money coming to
the city.
the city.
Keep up with today’s most important news
Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update.
Additional agencies, such as the MTA, have their own budgets, which spend tens of billions more.
Clearly the problem isn’t a shortage of money to spend.
The problem is a shortage of responsible spending.
Thus raising spending for “new needs,” as the politicians call their freebies, by hiking taxes and fees at this point is almost certain to create as many problems as it solves.
There is still time for the Dems to lay out a plan to actually reduce government costs.
The first debate was little more than a bidding game to see who could promise more new giveaways and most vehemently denounce Donald Trump while pledging to “resist” his presidency.
The second and final mayoral debate, required by the NYC Campaign Finance Board, will take place Thursday, with primary day falling on June 24.
It’s incumbent on the moderators to demand that Mamdani and all the others explain, with specifics, where they would get added funds and who would pay them.
Glib lines like taxing the “top 1%” mean nothing because those families already pay inordinate amounts of the city’s personal income tax.
According to a city comptroller report, in 2021 the top 1% — about 6,000 families who reported incomes of $1 million or more — paid a whopping 48% of the city’s total income tax haul.
It’s neither fair nor sensible to demand they pay more, when packing up and leaving altogether is proving to be so popular.
Leftward lurch
Unfortunately, we haven’t heard much of a different message from other candidates in the race, including Mayor Eric Adams, who is running as an independent.
With GOP candidate Curtis Sliwa widely considered not viable, there is so far no check or balance on the Dems’ leftward lurch.
The vast majority of their spendthrift City Council candidates and those seeking other offices on the ballot are proving to be automatic supporters of larger and more expensive programs.
National conversations about cutting taxes and reducing government waste, fraud and abuse have yet to find meaningful support in New York.
That must start to change this week.
What do you think? Post a comment.
Libs’ stupidity taking a toll
There they go again: Another major media outlet is confusing victimhood with the consequences of wrongdoing.
The bleeding-heart Boston Globe writes, “Unpaid fees jeopardize thousands of Mass. driver’s licenses,” saying, “Thousands of Massachusetts drivers each year face the possibility of losing their legal authority to drive unless debts unrelated to road safety are paid in full.”
Among the debts it cites are tolls the drivers evaded.
Here’s a crazy idea: The drivers could pay the tolls and keep their licenses.
Why is that so hard?
