• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Split New York City Mayoral Race

To notify a split thread.
So, slumlords, landlords, and real estate owners profits rose on average 12% that year. They, of course, do not want additional regulation on their hefty profits and have a fear of a pro-tenant mayor. This is why they poured so much money into Cuomo's bid for mayor and engaged in fearmongering propaganda.
I would not call it "fearmongering propaganda". I would call it sound economics. Price controls do not work, as they increase demand and discourage providing more supply. Then there are expenses. If the rent is not allowed to go up (Mamdani's plan is to "freeze the rent"), the expenses will still rise, even more so under Mamdani's policies such as tax hikes. Which means that offering apartments for rent will become unprofitable. I think he will use this as an excuse to expropriate landlords.

Also, you are conflating "rents rose x%" with "profits rose 12%". Those are not the same thing, because of aforementioned expenses.
 
Last edited:
I'm sharing an article that gives on the impression that the new mayor is not nearly as radical as some seem to think. Of course, I doubt many if any of those people will read it.
His prior statements ("winning socialism" by "seizing the means of production" and the like) as well as appointing extremists like Cea Weaver say otherwise.
It also took him a long time to issue a very mild rebuke to the pro-Hamas protest in Queens.
‘We support Hamas’ chants put Mamdani’s Israel stance at center stage
 
So, slumlords, landlords, and real estate owners profits rose on average 12% that year. They, of course, do not want additional regulation on their hefty profits and have a fear of a pro-tenant mayor. This is why they poured so much money into Cuomo's bid for mayor and engaged in fearmongering propaganda.
I would not call it "fearmongering propaganda". I would call it sound economics. Price controls do not work, as they increase demand and discourage providing more supply. Then there are expenses. If the rent is not allowed to go up (Mamdani's plan is to "freeze the rent"), the expenses will still rise, even more so under Mamdani's policies such as tax hikes. Which means that offering apartments for rent will become unprofitable. I think he will use this as an excuse to expropriate landlords.

Also, you are conflating "rents rose x%" with "profits rose 12%". Those are not the same thing, because of aforementioned expenses.

Here is what I am reading:
I would not call it "fearmongering propaganda." blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ...blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ...blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ...blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ...blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ...blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ...blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ...blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ...blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ... blah blah blah ...I think he will use this as an excuse to expropriate landlords.

Talking about expropriation is fearmongering.
 
Talking about expropriation is fearmongering.
Even when it's Mamdani himself who is talking about expropriating landlords?


The gameplan seems to be:
1. Freeze the rent, limiting how much landlords can make while expenses increase year over year
2. Landlords (not just bad landlords) cannot afford to keep up with maintenance
3. Code violations rack up
4. Mamdani uses that as pretext for Special Enforcement Program to "take over buildings", i.e. expropriate the landlords.
5. Profit.
 
Talking about expropriation is fearmongering.
Even when it's Mamdani himself who is talking about expropriating landlords?


The gameplan seems to be.
1. Freeze the rent
2. Landlords (not just bad landlords) cannot afford to keep up with maintenance
3. Code violations rack up
4. Mamdani uses that as pretext for Special Enforcement Program to "take over buildings", i.e. expropriate the landlords.

The use of “seems” transforms your musings into fearmongering.
 
The use of “seems” makes it fearmongering.
No, it's extrapolation. Especially when he has talked before about abolishing private property rights to "fix" housing.

Expropriating landlords is his goal, as he told us himself.
”Extrapolation” - fearmongering in this case. There is no way the Mayor of NYC can expropriate most of the rental units, let alone all landlords.
 
”Extrapolation” - fearmongering in this case.
Repeating nonsense does not make it any better, Hound.
There is no way the Mayor of NYC can expropriate most of the rental units, let alone all landlords.
I think he will attempt it with many of the rent stabilized housing stock after he freezes the rent for a few years. Of course there will be lawsuits trying to stop these attempts. That there will be resistance to his plans does not make it "fearmongering".
 
”Extrapolation” - fearmongering in this case.
Repeating nonsense does not make it any better, Hound.
Given your responses, it is difficult to take that face value.

Derec said:
There is no way the Mayor of NYC can expropriate most of the rental units, let alone all landlords.
I think he will attempt it with many of the rent stabilized housing stock after he freezes the rent for a few years. Of course there will be lawsuits trying to stop these attempts. That there will be resistance to his plans does not make it "fearmongering".
More fearmongering. He talked about stabilizing rent in rent controlled apartments which comprise about half the rental stock. He doesn’t have the power for your “thinking”.
 
More fearmongering. He talked about stabilizing rent in rent controlled apartments which comprise about half the rental stock. He doesn’t have the power for your “thinking”.
I already explained it to you. He wants to freeze the rent (i.e. 0% increase allowed) on so-called "rent stabilized" apartments. As you say, that's about half of rental stock, so we are talking millions of units. Without increases in rents, and with expenses rising, landlords will not be able to keep up with maintenance, and Mamdani has said that he will take over such buildings. That is consistent with his prior statements about abolishing private property rights to ensure housing for all.
It's not fearmongering; it's about what the new mayor has said himself.
 
Last edited:
More fearmongering. He talked about stabilizing rent in rent controlled apartments which comprise about half the rental stock. He doesn’t have the power for your “thinking”.
I already explained it to you. ….
And I have shown, your explanation is fearmongering because it based on unrealistic “extrapolations”.
 
More fearmongering. He talked about stabilizing rent in rent controlled apartments which comprise about half the rental stock. He doesn’t have the power for your “thinking”.
I already explained it to you. ….
And I have shown, your explanation is fearmongering because it based on unrealistic “extrapolations”.
...and thinking that the landlords in NYC are fucking stupid and don't have lawyers.
 
So they haven't banned private ownership yet in NYC.
So, is that a criterion now? Unless Rafiq Zohran outright bans private real estate ownership in NYC things are peachy?

We know that Mamdani has said that his end-goal was "winning socialism" by "seizing the means of production". And in another instance he floated abolishing private property as a way to "fix" housing. And how he has appointed a woman who wrote very similar things, but she also combined it with racism.
The words are concerning but what's actually going to happen is nada. If he hasn't already, he's going to find out just how ineffective he will be. Real estate prices aren't going to drop and businesses aren't going anywhere. It's NYC for Christ's sake. "Safely ignored" is an understatement when it comes to this guy.
 
Two more for good measure:
cea-weaver-tweet-communists.png
G97n6J6XkAAXeW3.jpg


Plus this video:


Why are so many mentally ill women like this? Jeezus, the US college system really has done a number on so many young women.

It's not just women. Heterosexual male self-hatred is encouraged as well. I considered myself pretty well left of center until recently, but attending college made me understand that [legitimate] conservatives have a well-founded disdain for what happens in our universities.

"WTF are you on about?" became a common thought, but I did learn that grossly activist professors read a silly rumor off the internet and came to believe that Jamey Lee Curtis wasn't a woman.

To quote Mr. Mackey, "Uh, mm'kay."
 
Two more for good measure:
cea-weaver-tweet-communists.png
G97n6J6XkAAXeW3.jpg


Plus this video:


Why are so many mentally ill women like this? Jeezus, the US college system really has done a number on so many young women.

So if you are able to diagnose people with mental illness with no qualifications whatsoever, I assume you're OK with people self diagnosing with autism or depression?
 
Back
Top Bottom