FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
on 01 Jul 04:27
nextcollapse
I can’t decide if I want him to enact all his communist/socialist policies and give American’s a first hand experience of why Communism is terrible, or if I want common sense to prevail and his communist/socialist policies are stopped before he can destroy NYC.
chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
on 01 Jul 04:32
nextcollapse
Do you have any specific policies you are worried about?
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
on 01 Jul 04:43
collapse
Just the general racist “take all the white mans stuff and give it to minorities”, “seize the means of production” garbage. You know, communism things.
chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world
on 01 Jul 04:46
nextcollapse
Cool. I just wanted to make sure my downvote and block was warranted.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
on 01 Jul 06:41
collapse
If you read carefully, Mr. Doctor, I’m deliberately addressing the rest of the articles only. I hadn’t even watched the video because I block Twitter. I’m calling out your sources for the sensational and loaded message that they’re sending out and that you seem to reference without pause instead of, you know, linking direclty to the video itself.
Unfortunately for you, he makes no metion of white people specifically because (surprise!) the video is a dud. But it’s telling that that’s what your mind accepts based on these headlines alone from dubious sources and even dare to double down on it.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
on 01 Jul 10:23
collapse
Oh so you’re not even watching the videos while replying half a dozen times about the content of them. Explains a lot.
LOL! Any excuse to not wipe the floor with you again, huh.
And yes, I did watch. Only after I realized that the contents of the video were unrelated to what you were claiming based on the headlines after your three seconds of googling.
This is not the race issue your sources are trying to make it out to be. You do realize that if he’s targeting white rich neighborhoods, it’s because there are disproportionately many of them, right? Or do you really think he’d codify whiteness as a requisite for the tax to apply?? xD
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
on 01 Jul 14:53
collapse
Wipe the floor with me again? I don’t even know who you are, and you’ve done nothing but make yourself look like a fool, and admit you didn’t even look at the links provided.
Won’t be making the mistake of replying to you again. See ya kid.
Oh, we’ve crossed paths before. I have you tagged for some dumb shit you were arguing before. Not surprised you’re onto this now.
And don’t you worry, even if you block me I’ll still be fact checking you every time I see it.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
on 02 Jul 00:07
collapse
A neckbeard “fact checking” me and saying “no you’re wrong, 2+2 = 5!” and then patting himself on his back and saying how he “wiped the floor with me” is nothing to worry about. I will enjoy knowing that you’re fuming behind your keyboard every time I post and don’t see your reply :)
This you? Because whoever that is got ratio’d hard. But show me how I said 2+2=5, go ahead. Because that whole thread is you getting your ass handed to you.
Also, you never answered my question: Doctor of what, exactly? BS? It shows.
fuming behind your keyboard
No, boo, don’t forget I have you tagged and I have the patience of a thousand house cats for dealing with scum.
every time I post and don’t see your reply
The ego! 😂 Has it crossed your mind that it’s not about you and that people will see your bullshit on full blast?
FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
on 01 Jul 12:41
collapse
Can’t even articulate an actual critique. Definitely a cop.
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
on 01 Jul 05:11
nextcollapse
Yeah man, reverting back to the old stabilized rent control policies and opening a city owned wholesale grocers, and making DoorDash pay minimum wage. Socialism as in Norway, not Stalin.
Stalin was the dude who purged all of his dissenters from his party, implemented mass deportations, and threw people in lawless gulags. Kind of like America’s current president.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
on 01 Jul 06:39
nextcollapse
Do you understand that even just in the category of communism, there is an enormous gamut of different approaches, of which you only seem to understand a very specific one? You understand that the bolshevicks, even under Lenin, murdered the “competing” communist groups, effectively regressing right back to authoritarianism and what would inevitably degrade into Stalinist autocracy? And so that even the, mischaracterizing, claim that “communism” went bad is basically nonsensical?
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
on 01 Jul 23:55
collapse
Can you show me the communist countries, of any approach, where they are flourishing with no poor people, everyone is financially well off, wealth is equally distributed, and there is no ruling class and no impoverished underclass?
effectively regressing right back to authoritarianism
Because that’s what communism always becomes, by design.
New York state has a whole bunch of power over the city too. I think the city had real bad finances a long time ago and part of bailout by the state came with a whole bunch of power.
litchralee@sh.itjust.works
on 01 Jul 04:54
nextcollapse
I’m no expert in New York City governance; I’m not even on the same coast as New York. West Coast, Best Coast.
With that said, NYC’s size and structure is not too dissimilar to that of a US State, save for a unicameral legislative body (New York City Council). Matching that, the Mayor of NYC is the head of the executive, with powers to appoint commissioners to various agencies and civil/criminal courts, as well as executive functions like administering city services like fire departments, police, and tax collection.
Meanwhile, the 51-member Council is headed by the Speaker, who presides over the body and controls the order that legislation is considered. So far as I can tell, the members are elected by district, every four years, so that each district has roughly the same population. So far, these procedures parallel those of US State governments.
As for the interplay between the Mayor and the Council, the defining criteria of any government is how it achieves its policy objectives, in passing the budget. Like with the California Governor, the Mayor’s office will propose – and later execute once duly-passed – the budget and the Council will consider and approve or reject it. The final budget is sent to the Mayor for ratification, but can also be vetoed. In this case, the Council can vote to override a mayoral veto.
So for the titular question, with regards to only the structure of the government of NYC, yes, the Council could very much block much of what a future Mayor Mamdani wants to achieve. The Council could do this by passing laws that mandate minimum fares for transit, forcing tax breaks for the wealthy, and anything else that directly counters his policies. But he could veto such laws, and the Council would have to muster some 2/3 of the votes to push it through.
In turn, though, a future Mayor Mamdani could potentially use his executive control to direct the transit system to vary (read: change) the tariff structure so that bus routes in less well-off neighborhoods become free. Within the parameters of existing law, the Mayor could also instruct the Police Chief to do (or not do) certain things, and this wouldn’t be within the Council’s direct control except that they could have a Council committee do an investigation and raise new legislation. But that goes back to what the Council can and can’t do.
Essentially, there’s a fair amount of ground for a progressive NYC Mayor to deliver campaign promises, except that the budget and existing laws will require working with the Council. But as a practical matter, if a future mayor wins a substantial fraction of the city-wide vote, it would be strange that 2/3 of the Council could be in staunch opposition.
And that budget vulnerability can actually be a negotiating tactic. Here in California, setting aside any broader opinions about the policies and wisdom of the currently second-term Governor of California, he managed to negotiate a bill to cut red-tape for housing (or roll-back environmental laws, depending on who you ask) and tie it to the state budget, due end of June. So when push comes to shove, when the budget is coming due, there would suddenly be room to negotiate, even with bitter enemies. No one respects a government that cannot pass a budget on-time.
I personally am of the opinion that when a legislative body wishes to obstruct, or when an executive wants to pursue a policy, then neither should half-arse it. A future Mayor Mamdani should force the Council to publicly reject what he wants to put forward, each and every time. Let the people of NYC see who is actually fighting for the citizenry, and who is kowtowing to monied interests. Commentators often talk about “spending political capital” when doggedly pursuing a policy, but that’s kinda the job: do it right, or step aside and let someone else do it. NYC deserves the best mayor they can get.
RegalPotoo@lemmy.world
on 01 Jul 05:02
nextcollapse
Mayor of New York isn’t the end goal
phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
on 01 Jul 09:28
collapse
It isn’t but if it can’t work at that scale how do you convince anyone it will work when it’s larger scale? Showing feasibility is important.
Chainweasel@lemmy.world
on 01 Jul 11:03
nextcollapse
I think it’s less about what he’s capable of doing and more about what he signifies.
Electing an openly socialist mayor to one of the biggest cities in the country is a huge step, one that could gain momentum and they definitely do not want more of that happening, especially in the house and Senate.
They think if they nip it in the bud now they may be able to get ahead of it, but I think they fail to realize they might make a political martyr out of him instead.
I think the state legislature and governor will be more of a hurdle to clear than council. Since in US and Canada, most municipal powers are rooted in state/provincial legislation, they have the ability to override or veto, sanction or outlaw anything the city tries to implement. Gov. Hochul is an establishment Democrat so I expect some efforts to water down the most radical policies, but aside from her characteristic flip-flopping she won’t try to put herself in the way of city politics.
Hadn’t thought of that, but just checked and NYC is 42% of the state’s population. I would think state politicians crossing a popular mayor a highly risky proposition.
threaded - newest
I can’t decide if I want him to enact all his communist/socialist policies and give American’s a first hand experience of why Communism is terrible, or if I want common sense to prevail and his communist/socialist policies are stopped before he can destroy NYC.
Do you have any specific policies you are worried about?
Just the general racist “take all the white mans stuff and give it to minorities”, “seize the means of production” garbage. You know, communism things.
Cool. I just wanted to make sure my downvote and block was warranted.
media2.giphy.com/media/…/giphy.gif
So, stuff you made up.
He’s literally on record saying those are his plan lol
www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/…/ar-AA1HJ64f
nypost.com/…/socialist-nyc-mayoral-contender-zohr…
Still think I made it up?
Oh no, you wouldn’t be so clever. I think you just fall for obvious pieces of propaganda.
So videos of the guy saying exactly what I said he is saying are “propaganda”? Propaganda for who exactly?
Where did you get that from?
How do you understand it?
nypost.com/…/socialist-nyc-mayoral-contender-zohr…
www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/…/ar-AA1HJ64f
Wahhh, not the rich & white folks who mostly all happen to be both rich AND white for some mysterious reason that we can’t deduce historically! Noo! 😭
NY Post
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/1bc0b70d-f971-47ec-9b2c-8e8a6146e1b1.png">
TOI (Times of India) World Desk via MSN
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/59709d49-c727-4cda-8112-f85dadbfc0c1.png">
Anyway, kindly fuck off with your propaganda please. :)
You are literally watching videos of the guy saying exactly what I told you he said, and saying he didn’t say it lol
If you read carefully, Mr. Doctor, I’m deliberately addressing the rest of the articles only. I hadn’t even watched the video because I block Twitter. I’m calling out your sources for the sensational and loaded message that they’re sending out and that you seem to reference without pause instead of, you know, linking direclty to the video itself.
Unfortunately for you, he makes no metion of white people specifically because (surprise!) the video is a dud. But it’s telling that that’s what your mind accepts based on these headlines alone from dubious sources and even dare to double down on it.
Oh so you’re not even watching the videos while replying half a dozen times about the content of them. Explains a lot.
See ya.
He does specifically say white people btw.
LOL! Any excuse to not wipe the floor with you again, huh.
And yes, I did watch. Only after I realized that the contents of the video were unrelated to what you were claiming based on the headlines after your three seconds of googling.
This is not the race issue your sources are trying to make it out to be. You do realize that if he’s targeting white rich neighborhoods, it’s because there are disproportionately many of them, right? Or do you really think he’d codify whiteness as a requisite for the tax to apply?? xD
Wipe the floor with me again? I don’t even know who you are, and you’ve done nothing but make yourself look like a fool, and admit you didn’t even look at the links provided.
Won’t be making the mistake of replying to you again. See ya kid.
Oh, we’ve crossed paths before. I have you tagged for some dumb shit you were arguing before. Not surprised you’re onto this now.
And don’t you worry, even if you block me I’ll still be fact checking you every time I see it.
A neckbeard “fact checking” me and saying “no you’re wrong, 2+2 = 5!” and then patting himself on his back and saying how he “wiped the floor with me” is nothing to worry about. I will enjoy knowing that you’re fuming behind your keyboard every time I post and don’t see your reply :)
Bird, please. I will maul you.
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/a6c9af82-e14e-4e61-9e0b-31a3e12e20d7.png">
This you? Because whoever that is got ratio’d hard. But show me how I said 2+2=5, go ahead. Because that whole thread is you getting your ass handed to you.
Also, you never answered my question: Doctor of what, exactly? BS? It shows.
No, boo, don’t forget I have you tagged and I have the patience of a thousand house cats for dealing with scum.
The ego! 😂 Has it crossed your mind that it’s not about you and that people will see your bullshit on full blast?
Can’t even articulate an actual critique. Definitely a cop.
Yeah man, reverting back to the old stabilized rent control policies and opening a city owned wholesale grocers, and making DoorDash pay minimum wage. Socialism as in Norway, not Stalin.
Stalin was the dude who purged all of his dissenters from his party, implemented mass deportations, and threw people in lawless gulags. Kind of like America’s current president.
www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/…/ar-AA1HJ64f
I’m sure the people that fled communist countries because of how bad communism went, destroying the countries in the process, would disagree with you.
Do you understand that even just in the category of communism, there is an enormous gamut of different approaches, of which you only seem to understand a very specific one? You understand that the bolshevicks, even under Lenin, murdered the “competing” communist groups, effectively regressing right back to authoritarianism and what would inevitably degrade into Stalinist autocracy? And so that even the, mischaracterizing, claim that “communism” went bad is basically nonsensical?
Can you show me the communist countries, of any approach, where they are flourishing with no poor people, everyone is financially well off, wealth is equally distributed, and there is no ruling class and no impoverished underclass?
Because that’s what communism always becomes, by design.
It should be pointed out that Norway is not socialist. It’s a social democracy/capitalist country.
Some people clearly never been fishing with the way they respond to bait
Muh freedumb!
You’re not very good at this…
Tell me you're a christian nationalist, without actually telling me.
Atheist but good try.
I’ve never heard of an atheist Christian Nationalist before. How do you deal with the cognitive dissonance?
How do you manage to reply semi on topic without being able to read? Remarkable.
^ This guy is a cop.
New York state has a whole bunch of power over the city too. I think the city had real bad finances a long time ago and part of bailout by the state came with a whole bunch of power.
I’m no expert in New York City governance; I’m not even on the same coast as New York. West Coast, Best Coast.
With that said, NYC’s size and structure is not too dissimilar to that of a US State, save for a unicameral legislative body (New York City Council). Matching that, the Mayor of NYC is the head of the executive, with powers to appoint commissioners to various agencies and civil/criminal courts, as well as executive functions like administering city services like fire departments, police, and tax collection.
Meanwhile, the 51-member Council is headed by the Speaker, who presides over the body and controls the order that legislation is considered. So far as I can tell, the members are elected by district, every four years, so that each district has roughly the same population. So far, these procedures parallel those of US State governments.
As for the interplay between the Mayor and the Council, the defining criteria of any government is how it achieves its policy objectives, in passing the budget. Like with the California Governor, the Mayor’s office will propose – and later execute once duly-passed – the budget and the Council will consider and approve or reject it. The final budget is sent to the Mayor for ratification, but can also be vetoed. In this case, the Council can vote to override a mayoral veto.
So for the titular question, with regards to only the structure of the government of NYC, yes, the Council could very much block much of what a future Mayor Mamdani wants to achieve. The Council could do this by passing laws that mandate minimum fares for transit, forcing tax breaks for the wealthy, and anything else that directly counters his policies. But he could veto such laws, and the Council would have to muster some 2/3 of the votes to push it through.
In turn, though, a future Mayor Mamdani could potentially use his executive control to direct the transit system to vary (read: change) the tariff structure so that bus routes in less well-off neighborhoods become free. Within the parameters of existing law, the Mayor could also instruct the Police Chief to do (or not do) certain things, and this wouldn’t be within the Council’s direct control except that they could have a Council committee do an investigation and raise new legislation. But that goes back to what the Council can and can’t do.
Essentially, there’s a fair amount of ground for a progressive NYC Mayor to deliver campaign promises, except that the budget and existing laws will require working with the Council. But as a practical matter, if a future mayor wins a substantial fraction of the city-wide vote, it would be strange that 2/3 of the Council could be in staunch opposition.
And that budget vulnerability can actually be a negotiating tactic. Here in California, setting aside any broader opinions about the policies and wisdom of the currently second-term Governor of California, he managed to negotiate a bill to cut red-tape for housing (or roll-back environmental laws, depending on who you ask) and tie it to the state budget, due end of June. So when push comes to shove, when the budget is coming due, there would suddenly be room to negotiate, even with bitter enemies. No one respects a government that cannot pass a budget on-time.
I personally am of the opinion that when a legislative body wishes to obstruct, or when an executive wants to pursue a policy, then neither should half-arse it. A future Mayor Mamdani should force the Council to publicly reject what he wants to put forward, each and every time. Let the people of NYC see who is actually fighting for the citizenry, and who is kowtowing to monied interests. Commentators often talk about “spending political capital” when doggedly pursuing a policy, but that’s kinda the job: do it right, or step aside and let someone else do it. NYC deserves the best mayor they can get.
Mayor of New York isn’t the end goal
It isn’t but if it can’t work at that scale how do you convince anyone it will work when it’s larger scale? Showing feasibility is important.
I think it’s less about what he’s capable of doing and more about what he signifies.
Electing an openly socialist mayor to one of the biggest cities in the country is a huge step, one that could gain momentum and they definitely do not want more of that happening, especially in the house and Senate.
They think if they nip it in the bud now they may be able to get ahead of it, but I think they fail to realize they might make a political martyr out of him instead.
I think the state legislature and governor will be more of a hurdle to clear than council. Since in US and Canada, most municipal powers are rooted in state/provincial legislation, they have the ability to override or veto, sanction or outlaw anything the city tries to implement. Gov. Hochul is an establishment Democrat so I expect some efforts to water down the most radical policies, but aside from her characteristic flip-flopping she won’t try to put herself in the way of city politics.
Hadn’t thought of that, but just checked and NYC is 42% of the state’s population. I would think state politicians crossing a popular mayor a highly risky proposition.
Hopefully, he will be able to overthrow the city council so he can enact his policies.
Or he’s stripped of citizenship and deported by Trump
theguardian.com/…/trump-zohran-mamdani-citizenshi…