Hacker News Reader

>This isnt even getting into hos antisemitism “the boot of the nypd on your neck was laced by the idf” should have disqualified him, that kind of antisemitic talk was only on /pol/ like 2 years ago.

Is that antisemitic? It's a fact that American cops are routinely trained by a foreign military with a track record of disregarding human rights. It's a fact that the NYPD has a recent history of police brutality. What's next? Mentioning that the US trained deathsquads in LATAM is Gringophobic?

Also I'm not that sure 4chan is worried about police brutality even if it's a excuse to say antisemitic slurs.

Mamdani has said basically none of the things you claim here. These are all clearly mischaracterizations of what he's actually said aimed and convincing someone like you to think he's a bad choice. In particular Mamdani has been extremely clear that he has no plans to defund the police in any fashion. In fact, he wants to enable NYPD to get back to solving crimes rather than incidents better handled by mental health professionals (e.g. people tweaking, by themselves, all alone, on the subway platform)

How about watch some actual interviews in which Mamdani states what he wants to do rather than only get your information from third parties who clearly want to emphasize particular angles?

Zohran isn't proposing putting any new units under rent control (really rent stabilization), only temporarily halting raises to rents for existing stabilized units. This will make it harder for the city to attract new buildings to join rent stabilization in the future, but will benefit existing habitants. It won't have any effect on the ability to profitably develop market rate units at all.

Property developer here. I have zero faith that NYC would not put rent control on new units in the future. I will invest nothing in NYC and will tell every other developer I know to avoid it like the plague.

If NYC actually makes it easy to build there's practically infinity investment available. Sure dude, nobody will build >1M condos because you told them not to.

Mamdani is not advocating for it. His goals include attempts to make development cheaper.

You sound like a doom sayer who'd stop investing in the USA because the current admin has made it an unsafe environment.

It's unfortunate because all you have to do is talk to landlords to figure out what's happening (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KbGulTc4TY). Lots of people own buildings, but they're legally prevented from renting them out without taking a loss. The result is you can't bring units back onto the market after they empty, and it becomes harder to find housing.

Austin reduced rent prices by ~20% by building more housing even as the overall city population grew. Other small cities have seen rents decrease through active immigration policing. We know how to fix housing pricing there's just no motivation too, people want expensive, exclusive neighborhoods

Excuse me, in that video the second gentleman inherited a building bought in the late 50's. Meaning he has no mortgage, his costs are tax, unit related maintenance and the legally required renovation costs.

The apartment has stayed "untouched since the tenant passed away". It's clearly is still full of stuff of the deceased! I would understand if there's a big renovation needed (e.g., Asbestos removal, a hard to fix leak, replacing the entire plumbing/electric, etc.) but certainly one would've at least cleared the place oneself if the money is tight.

The non-controlled apartment he shows doesn't seem that different beyond aesthetics, sure the modern lighting and new paint job looks nice but the windows are just single-pane like the mothballed unit. I find it telling that he doesn't mention any specific issue, or that he frames not breaking even on the first month as shocking. I've seen plenty of NYC apartment tours in the internet of random 20 somethings. A lot of them didn't look like they were renovated in this millennium.

Isn't by definition, a landlord a property investor? Is it some tragedy if he has to invest and wait for a return? The building has been in his family for close to 70 years, did they do maintenance and renovations proactively? If he's so strapped for cash and doesn't have the cashflow or credit to repair the building, why doesn't he sell? Even if the price is lower because the rent control, the asset appreciation since the Eisenhower administration must be absurd.

Yes, the actual solution is building like crazy, but is kinda insulting to blame rent control while showing landlords crying woe is me and sealing apartments with the tenant fresh in the morgue, transparently making a bet that rent control will be repealed because they are letting their units to rot.

Crimes in the city is down in the long term and there's been a Covid spike that also happened around the country regardless of the elected officials.

  The city already has a crime problem

The city does not have a crime problem. It exists, but its down, and its lower than most comparable (and smaller cities). NYC is safe.

  Socialism has a bad track record for a reason

Only because people confuse it with "communism", otherwise it has a great track record.

  This isnt even getting into hos antisemitism

Yeah, thats why Brad Landers, the most prominent elected Jewish member of the NYC political scene endorsed him and campaigned with him?

Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about?

Their profile says they’re from philly so yeah. . .

Socialism works in places with more or less homogenous populations. I always hear Norway/Sweden have universial everything. Yes they do cause taxes are sky high and the culture there is more or less the same.

NYC is not Norway.

People in Norway let babies sleep outside the supermarket when they go shopping. When you have that level of trust in a society, socialism has a fighting chance for sure.

I think the establishment messed up big time here and Mamdami snatched it up.

Trust only comes from building it. I think you're confusing cause and effect here. Norway has a higher trust society not because of who they are but because of how they treat one another.

I think you are cherry picking a few examples that you’ve heard about and inferring so so much into how they work based on generalizations at a country level. Not a very solid base.

let me guess, you are significantly less concerned about the much more blatant rhetoric used to disqualify zohran on his percieved religious association, arent you?

I don't know why people reflexively vote down comments like this one since it is completely reasonable in every way. Just, I guess, leftists who can't accept viewpoints they don't agree with? Like really--read some history books, maybe read up on how bad communism was in Eastern Europe and what led to its total collapse? Let's not go down that road again! There's plenty of examples out there already. I don't even get the hatred for Israel thing particularly, either--WWII was really, really bad for Jews. They deserve a homeland of their own and all these people complaining and calling everyone Nazis need to take a long look in the mirror--the major component of Nazism was ANTISEMITISM! It is morally reprehensible and it's been a struggle since 1948 because that hatred endures.

Maybe it's because you're throwing around terms like "communism" incorrectly while simultaneously telling people they need to read history books.

It's the same term Trump has been using to fear monger around Zoran's candidacy, and doesn't seem to relate to any of his actual policies.

If you can enlighten us about the relationship between 1950s soviet bloc communism in eastern europe and a fairly run-of-the-mill 2020s Bernie-styled democratic socalist platform, I'm all ears.

If you're genuinely open to this conversation - the Soviet Union funded many of the world's labor movements, giving it varying amounts of influence on them. Influence which it sometimes used to spread talking points of its own choice and to its benefit. Democratic Socialists of America was born from a branch of one of these movements. This is more visible looking at DSA's foreign policy platform, where today they use virtually identical talking points to those the Soviet Union distributed to their partners back in the 60s and 70s.

I don't know if a purely organic and independent socialist movement could have existed, but in this world, the movements with the means and resources to get their voices heard are going to be the ones who inherited resources and networks from their predecessors.

mamdani, circa 2021

"But then there are also other issues that we firmly believe in, whether it's BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions of Israel), right, or whether it's the end goal of seizing the means of production, where we do not have the same level of support at this very moment.

"And what I want to say is that it is critical that the way that we organize, the way that we set up our you know, set up our work and our priorities, that we do not leave any one issue for the other, that we do not meet a moment and only look at what people are ready for, but that we are doing both of these things in tandem, because it is critical for us to both meet people where they're at and to also organize and organize for what is correct and for what is right and to ensure over time we can bring people to that issue."

so yes, it's not 1950s soviet bloc communism. it's more like he has as a target 1917

Oh this isn't communism. Here are the facts, the Bolsheviks were a faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. They originally participated in the democratic process before they took power. Regardless of the fact that they are going through the steps now, the end goal of the DSA is the abolishment of private property. Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, whatever you want to call it, is a uniquely evil ideology that kills millions as they hate anyone with more money. It has not worked a single time it has been attempted. Every single time it has been tried in any form, Mao, Pol Pot, Lenin/Stalin, etc. millions die.

> the end goal of the DSA is the abolishment of private property

why confidently post something so obviously wrong...?

"Socialism, Communism, Anarchism, whatever you want to call it". Those are 3 very different things. And so you just bucket democratic socialists into "basket of scary things I don't like", and call it a day... I really don't think this is how political discourse should function.