Non resident luxury tax on $5M + properties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First of all, rumors of the City's demise are over-rated. Please stop paraphrasing the doom and gloom of the NY Post. I am not a fan of Mamdani either but some of the drama is ridiculous. Mamdani could be the best mayor on earth (he is far from it) and they would be badmouthing him and idiots would be repeating it.

Mamdani was lucky that Hochul handed him a lifeline. Which we will all still be paying for as NYS residents. She also made some sweetheart deals to get herself re-elected, particularly with some of the unions - we were finally getting the state's pensions under control and she made a huge giveaway on that. Mamdani's pension deal is not ideal but really not that horrible.

Mamdani claims to be creating his version of DOGE. I think this might have some small wins but overall will be about as useful as Trump's was. Let's see how many of Mamdani's buddies get hired at inflated salaries to run this thing then have victory parades for saving $50 here and there.

But again, I think the city will be fine. Good riddance to anyone who leaves - I think the last wave that moved to Miami was culling the herd of whiners. I would like their tax dollars but can live without them.

The city has survived the doomsday commentary for a while - so it's all good if you are thinking another round of tax hikes.

i agree with your points on the governor.

the only way Mamdani can make progress on his affordability is to make the city run cheaper. there is a tremendous amount of waste in the city budget. That can be worked on - and i think the mayor will work on it.

personally what I would do for the affordability crisis is remove ALL city/state income taxes on below $45k (median income) - that puts an extra $3k in the pockets of the people that need it the most. and scale the removal of income taxes up to $75k (so only graduallly paying it until 75k or maybe 100k).

pay for this in three ways - and depending on how much you can cut - how much higher in the income taxes you can go
1) reduce the home health care giveaway - tighten eligibility a significant amount, require better documentations). it's $12B of money and my guess you can tighten eligibility and save $2B.
2) reduce and/or eliminate the overtime for the city employees (fire, police). $1B
3) curtail right to shelter after 60 days for illegals (might be harder to do and less savings). A better approach is probably to combine the new 60 day rule with a one time get out of NYC benefit - pay them $20k to leave NYC and forgo any future right to shelter benefit.

i believe if we tighten those 3 things up we can get rid of income taxes for anyone making less than $100k. that's alot of money in average people's hands.

the benefit is that it makes people realize how much grifting is going on and how it's costing them real $$.

I will focus on 2 and 3 as I don't know a lot about 1.

2. You will never eliminate OT. You can definitely improve a lot by hiring properly and making sure it is paid only when absolutely necessary. Also, if you made OT wages not considered part of your salary when calculating pensions, it would save a fortune in the long run. Tons of police and fire and others retired shortly after 9/11 because they were working lots of OT so their stepped up salaries for those years that were used to calculate their pensions were gigantic. This should be easy but good luck negotiating it with the unions - as I mentioned above, Hochul just caved to the unions on pensions after we had finally been making some progress over the years.
3. If you curtail right to shelter, then what happens to them? They are on the street? And I'm not sure about differentiating illegals vs. in general. Though illegal immigration is legitimately an issue and needs to be dealt with, this nation's ridiculous obsession with it is a result of Trump's craziness (and the fact that nutjob Stephen Miller seems to have his ear).

An additional solution to this problem is that it should not just by our problem. NYC is the most expensive place in America. If you want to provide for these people, it doesn't have to be done here. Similar to your point of a one way bus ticket, find other places to provide for them. And while you're at it, build psych hospitals and the like in more rural areas. Living in NYC is not an absolute right.

To that point, I think that NYCHA and other public housing could be tightened up a lot. When my upper middle class parents no longer wanted to pay the high taxes in the suburb where I was raised, they downsized to a smaller home nearby. They would have loved to keep the house but it didn't make financial sense. Yet someone who raised a lot of kids in a big NYCHA apartment gets to stay there after their kids are gone (don't get me started on people having children they can't afford - not much one can do about that that isn't totally inhumane). Right size NYCHA apartments. And similar to the above, use the most valuable, prime real estate for the most valuable purposes. I am not saying this to be NIMBY but you can sell prime land for a lot for private homes and use all the money to build a lot more homes elsewhere.

Also, I was a big fan of Bloomberg but I'm not sure about his push for smaller schools so there are a bunch of schools in the same place. This created a lot more bureaucracy, which could be avoided.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First of all, rumors of the City's demise are over-rated. Please stop paraphrasing the doom and gloom of the NY Post. I am not a fan of Mamdani either but some of the drama is ridiculous. Mamdani could be the best mayor on earth (he is far from it) and they would be badmouthing him and idiots would be repeating it.

Mamdani was lucky that Hochul handed him a lifeline. Which we will all still be paying for as NYS residents. She also made some sweetheart deals to get herself re-elected, particularly with some of the unions - we were finally getting the state's pensions under control and she made a huge giveaway on that. Mamdani's pension deal is not ideal but really not that horrible.

Mamdani claims to be creating his version of DOGE. I think this might have some small wins but overall will be about as useful as Trump's was. Let's see how many of Mamdani's buddies get hired at inflated salaries to run this thing then have victory parades for saving $50 here and there.

But again, I think the city will be fine. Good riddance to anyone who leaves - I think the last wave that moved to Miami was culling the herd of whiners. I would like their tax dollars but can live without them.

The city has survived the doomsday commentary for a while - so it's all good if you are thinking another round of tax hikes.

i agree with your points on the governor.

the only way Mamdani can make progress on his affordability is to make the city run cheaper. there is a tremendous amount of waste in the city budget. That can be worked on - and i think the mayor will work on it.

personally what I would do for the affordability crisis is remove ALL city/state income taxes on below $45k (median income) - that puts an extra $3k in the pockets of the people that need it the most. and scale the removal of income taxes up to $75k (so only graduallly paying it until 75k or maybe 100k).

pay for this in three ways - and depending on how much you can cut - how much higher in the income taxes you can go
1) reduce the home health care giveaway - tighten eligibility a significant amount, require better documentations). it's $12B of money and my guess you can tighten eligibility and save $2B.
2) reduce and/or eliminate the overtime for the city employees (fire, police). $1B
3) curtail right to shelter after 60 days for illegals (might be harder to do and less savings). A better approach is probably to combine the new 60 day rule with a one time get out of NYC benefit - pay them $20k to leave NYC and forgo any future right to shelter benefit.

i believe if we tighten those 3 things up we can get rid of income taxes for anyone making less than $100k. that's alot of money in average people's hands.

the benefit is that it makes people realize how much grifting is going on and how it's costing them real $$.

I will focus on 2 and 3 as I don't know a lot about 1.

2. You will never eliminate OT. You can definitely improve a lot by hiring properly and making sure it is paid only when absolutely necessary. Also, if you made OT wages not considered part of your salary when calculating pensions, it would save a fortune in the long run. Tons of police and fire and others retired shortly after 9/11 because they were working lots of OT so their stepped up salaries for those years that were used to calculate their pensions were gigantic. This should be easy but good luck negotiating it with the unions - as I mentioned above, Hochul just caved to the unions on pensions after we had finally been making some progress over the years.
3. If you curtail right to shelter, then what happens to them? They are on the street? And I'm not sure about differentiating illegals vs. in general. Though illegal immigration is legitimately an issue and needs to be dealt with, this nation's ridiculous obsession with it is a result of Trump's craziness (and the fact that nutjob Stephen Miller seems to have his ear).

An additional solution to this problem is that it should not just by our problem. NYC is the most expensive place in America. If you want to provide for these people, it doesn't have to be done here. Similar to your point of a one way bus ticket, find other places to provide for them. And while you're at it, build psych hospitals and the like in more rural areas. Living in NYC is not an absolute right.

To that point, I think that NYCHA and other public housing could be tightened up a lot. When my upper middle class parents no longer wanted to pay the high taxes in the suburb where I was raised, they downsized to a smaller home nearby. They would have loved to keep the house but it didn't make financial sense. Yet someone who raised a lot of kids in a big NYCHA apartment gets to stay there after their kids are gone (don't get me started on people having children they can't afford - not much one can do about that that isn't totally inhumane). Right size NYCHA apartments. And similar to the above, use the most valuable, prime real estate for the most valuable purposes. I am not saying this to be NIMBY but you can sell prime land for a lot for private homes and use all the money to build a lot more homes elsewhere.

Also, I was a big fan of Bloomberg but I'm not sure about his push for smaller schools so there are a bunch of schools in the same place. This created a lot more bureaucracy, which could be avoided.

the only reason i try to distinguish the illegals versus legals is that there is potentially some legal wiggle room in the law about illegals. otherwise the constitution has the right to shelter and it's going to be hard to remove it. and not sure if NYers would want to do that even if it was allowed. Living in NYC shouldn't be a right. At some point you have to think about the legal residents of the city. The "right to shelter" law was meant to protect people in temporary housing stress - which I am 100% for. you live here and experience homelessness - i want the city to help you. But taking advantage of generousity by coming here and then going straight into a shelter. not fair to the rest of us.

the OT rules are a scam, everyone knows it. But the issue is that if you include the city employees and the city employee retires that live in the city - that can be over 50% of the voting numbers. good luck getting much done on that. but you can work around the edges.

the public housing is a disaster, the places suck and it's not a good use of valuable real estate. I'd rather have it used for middle class families. but that's not happening - too many of the residents vote.

the home health care scam is another massive resource sink. 250k jobs - how many real? my guess less than 50%.

how many people are living in public housing, taking "care" of grandma - getting paid by the city/state and living in subsidized housing? all while working folks getting squeezed.

[Anonymous]

Sales of luxury homes in nyc are up 10 %

[Anonymous]

park slope townhouse on the market for 4.5ish million just sold for over 6. And it's not even 20" wide.

the rich are doing just fine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sales of luxury homes in nyc are up 10 %

Whatever. Put away the NY Post.

[Anonymous]

where is the data on the luxury homes up 10%?

and i think we need to see where the tax ends up, and see in 2-3 years if there is any change in behavior

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:where is the data on the luxury homes up 10%?

and i think we need to see where the tax ends up, and see in 2-3 years if there is any change in behavior

Google. It’s been reported around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can actually see why the tax might make sense but Mamdani was dumb going after Ken Griffin to appease "tax the rich" crown. He didn't bother to check Griffin's charitable activity in NYC. Over past few years Griffin donated:

- $400mm to Sloan Kettering cancer center
- $40mm to Museum of Natural History
- $12mm to NYC Hospital for Special Surgery
- $25mm to NYC success academy charter schools

Additional tax on Griffin's penthouse will be a drop in the ocean in comparison to these numbers. If Griffin decides to reduce his donations, NYC will be worse off.

Ken Griffin’s “donations” are a drop in the ocean compared to his net worth. He can f—k right off if he doesn’t like paying taxes.

+100. Also, it’s nice that Ken Griffin spent $almost 1/2 a billion on these donations, but I’d rather have that amount in the budget and have it decided democratically where that money should be spent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can actually see why the tax might make sense but Mamdani was dumb going after Ken Griffin to appease "tax the rich" crown. He didn't bother to check Griffin's charitable activity in NYC. Over past few years Griffin donated:

- $400mm to Sloan Kettering cancer center
- $40mm to Museum of Natural History
- $12mm to NYC Hospital for Special Surgery
- $25mm to NYC success academy charter schools

Additional tax on Griffin's penthouse will be a drop in the ocean in comparison to these numbers. If Griffin decides to reduce his donations, NYC will be worse off.

Ken Griffin’s “donations” are a drop in the ocean compared to his net worth. He can f—k right off if he doesn’t like paying taxes.

+100. Also, it’s nice that Ken Griffin spent $almost 1/2 a billion on these donations, but I’d rather have that amount in the budget and have it decided democratically where that money should be spent.

Ever think that the donations create jobs which create tax revenue? And create research that cures diseases? I'm not president of his fan club but he does a lot of good. Plus not to set the bar too low, but he is many, many times more philanthropic than Trump, Musk, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can actually see why the tax might make sense but Mamdani was dumb going after Ken Griffin to appease "tax the rich" crown. He didn't bother to check Griffin's charitable activity in NYC. Over past few years Griffin donated:

- $400mm to Sloan Kettering cancer center
- $40mm to Museum of Natural History
- $12mm to NYC Hospital for Special Surgery
- $25mm to NYC success academy charter schools

Additional tax on Griffin's penthouse will be a drop in the ocean in comparison to these numbers. If Griffin decides to reduce his donations, NYC will be worse off.

Ken Griffin’s “donations” are a drop in the ocean compared to his net worth. He can f—k right off if he doesn’t like paying taxes.

+100. Also, it’s nice that Ken Griffin spent $almost 1/2 a billion on these donations, but I’d rather have that amount in the budget and have it decided democratically where that money should be spent.

Ever think that the donations create jobs which create tax revenue? And create research that cures diseases? I'm not president of his fan club but he does a lot of good. Plus not to set the bar too low, but he is many, many times more philanthropic than Trump, Musk, etc.

But plenty of donations don’t work like that. They work however the donor wants them to. They can donate a new polo field to Dartmouth in exchange for guaranteed admission for their unqualified kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can actually see why the tax might make sense but Mamdani was dumb going after Ken Griffin to appease "tax the rich" crown. He didn't bother to check Griffin's charitable activity in NYC. Over past few years Griffin donated:

- $400mm to Sloan Kettering cancer center
- $40mm to Museum of Natural History
- $12mm to NYC Hospital for Special Surgery
- $25mm to NYC success academy charter schools

Additional tax on Griffin's penthouse will be a drop in the ocean in comparison to these numbers. If Griffin decides to reduce his donations, NYC will be worse off.

Ken Griffin’s “donations” are a drop in the ocean compared to his net worth. He can f—k right off if he doesn’t like paying taxes.

+100. Also, it’s nice that Ken Griffin spent $almost 1/2 a billion on these donations, but I’d rather have that amount in the budget and have it decided democratically where that money should be spent.

Ever think that the donations create jobs which create tax revenue? And create research that cures diseases? I'm not president of his fan club but he does a lot of good. Plus not to set the bar too low, but he is many, many times more philanthropic than Trump, Musk, etc.

But plenty of donations don’t work like that. They work however the donor wants them to. They can donate a new polo field to Dartmouth in exchange for guaranteed admission for their unqualified kid.

You're going to die on this hill, aren't you. So sad. Love being the contrarian.

I am generally not a fan of Griffin. But rather than trying to be such a know-it-all, use your brain for a second and google Ken Griffin philanthropy. He has done some pretty great things. Unless you hate MSK, the Michael J Fox Foundation and the National Constitution Center. And I'm sure he donated lots of money to Miami Dade College because that is exactly where he wants his kids to go.

Most people are not all good or all bad (Trump is 99.9% bad). The world isn't that simple. Going back to the original topic here, Mamdani picked the wrong guy to mess with. He is an idiot. He needs smarter people around him. New York City needs a grown-up in charge. Counting the days until Tisch takes over. And by the way, to my earlier point, Mamdani is not 100% bad either - I can acknowledge that he has some positives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can actually see why the tax might make sense but Mamdani was dumb going after Ken Griffin to appease "tax the rich" crown. He didn't bother to check Griffin's charitable activity in NYC. Over past few years Griffin donated:

- $400mm to Sloan Kettering cancer center
- $40mm to Museum of Natural History
- $12mm to NYC Hospital for Special Surgery
- $25mm to NYC success academy charter schools

Additional tax on Griffin's penthouse will be a drop in the ocean in comparison to these numbers. If Griffin decides to reduce his donations, NYC will be worse off.

Ken Griffin’s “donations” are a drop in the ocean compared to his net worth. He can f—k right off if he doesn’t like paying taxes.

+100. Also, it’s nice that Ken Griffin spent $almost 1/2 a billion on these donations, but I’d rather have that amount in the budget and have it decided democratically where that money should be spent.

Ever think that the donations create jobs which create tax revenue? And create research that cures diseases? I'm not president of his fan club but he does a lot of good. Plus not to set the bar too low, but he is many, many times more philanthropic than Trump, Musk, etc.

But plenty of donations don’t work like that. They work however the donor wants them to. They can donate a new polo field to Dartmouth in exchange for guaranteed admission for their unqualified kid.

You're going to die on this hill, aren't you. So sad. Love being the contrarian.

I am generally not a fan of Griffin. But rather than trying to be such a know-it-all, use your brain for a second and google Ken Griffin philanthropy. He has done some pretty great things. Unless you hate MSK, the Michael J Fox Foundation and the National Constitution Center. And I'm sure he donated lots of money to Miami Dade College because that is exactly where he wants his kids to go.

Most people are not all good or all bad (Trump is 99.9% bad). The world isn't that simple. Going back to the original topic here, Mamdani picked the wrong guy to mess with. He is an idiot. He needs smarter people around him. New York City needs a grown-up in charge. Counting the days until Tisch takes over. And by the way, to my earlier point, Mamdani is not 100% bad either - I can acknowledge that he has some positives.

what Tisch is going to take over?

as a unrelated, i think some Tisch person spoke at CGPS graduating ceremony. I don't know the details.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can actually see why the tax might make sense but Mamdani was dumb going after Ken Griffin to appease "tax the rich" crown. He didn't bother to check Griffin's charitable activity in NYC. Over past few years Griffin donated:

- $400mm to Sloan Kettering cancer center
- $40mm to Museum of Natural History
- $12mm to NYC Hospital for Special Surgery
- $25mm to NYC success academy charter schools

Additional tax on Griffin's penthouse will be a drop in the ocean in comparison to these numbers. If Griffin decides to reduce his donations, NYC will be worse off.

Ken Griffin’s “donations” are a drop in the ocean compared to his net worth. He can f—k right off if he doesn’t like paying taxes.

+100. Also, it’s nice that Ken Griffin spent $almost 1/2 a billion on these donations, but I’d rather have that amount in the budget and have it decided democratically where that money should be spent.

some people can find a reason to complain about anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can actually see why the tax might make sense but Mamdani was dumb going after Ken Griffin to appease "tax the rich" crown. He didn't bother to check Griffin's charitable activity in NYC. Over past few years Griffin donated:

- $400mm to Sloan Kettering cancer center
- $40mm to Museum of Natural History
- $12mm to NYC Hospital for Special Surgery
- $25mm to NYC success academy charter schools

Additional tax on Griffin's penthouse will be a drop in the ocean in comparison to these numbers. If Griffin decides to reduce his donations, NYC will be worse off.

Ken Griffin’s “donations” are a drop in the ocean compared to his net worth. He can f—k right off if he doesn’t like paying taxes.

+100. Also, it’s nice that Ken Griffin spent $almost 1/2 a billion on these donations, but I’d rather have that amount in the budget and have it decided democratically where that money should be spent.

Ever think that the donations create jobs which create tax revenue? And create research that cures diseases? I'm not president of his fan club but he does a lot of good. Plus not to set the bar too low, but he is many, many times more philanthropic than Trump, Musk, etc.

But plenty of donations don’t work like that. They work however the donor wants them to. They can donate a new polo field to Dartmouth in exchange for guaranteed admission for their unqualified kid.

You're going to die on this hill, aren't you. So sad. Love being the contrarian.

I am generally not a fan of Griffin. But rather than trying to be such a know-it-all, use your brain for a second and google Ken Griffin philanthropy. He has done some pretty great things. Unless you hate MSK, the Michael J Fox Foundation and the National Constitution Center. And I'm sure he donated lots of money to Miami Dade College because that is exactly where he wants his kids to go.

Most people are not all good or all bad (Trump is 99.9% bad). The world isn't that simple. Going back to the original topic here, Mamdani picked the wrong guy to mess with. He is an idiot. He needs smarter people around him. New York City needs a grown-up in charge. Counting the days until Tisch takes over. And by the way, to my earlier point, Mamdani is not 100% bad either - I can acknowledge that he has some positives.

Dp.
Mandani is an idiot? Interesting. Why is that? Seems like most people I know like him. People are very happy in NYC right now