In her Washington Post column Helaine Olen tries to strike a middle ground between James Altucher (“New York is doomed”) and Jerry Seinfeld (“New Yorkers are tough”):
New York City has always been a tough and expensive place to live, but there’s always been an unspoken deal: Put up with it, and you’ll get a front-row seat to the most vital city in the United States, with round-the-clock entertainment and unparalleled opportunities. But that’s gone, and the date of return is still to be determined. No wonder home sales are soaring in the nearby suburbs while Manhattan apartment vacancies are at a record high. Instead of insulting Altucher, those of us who love New York City might want to take his words as a warning — and a call to action.
but I find her prescription for “action” which require either a federal bailout, a better New York City mayor and New York governor, or both. Or, at least, for New York’s governor and mayor to start cooperating rather than posturing.
On the first point I absolutely, positively do not believe that the federal government should bail out New York just as I believe it should not bail out Chicago (Illinois) or Los Angeles (California). If there are federal bailouts they should be for all states or, at least, according to some formula that does not reward the profligate and punish the thrifty. A quick look at the balance sheets of New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles or New York, Illinois, and California should be enough to convince you they fit into the first category rather than the second.
As to the second issue I’m not optimistic. While Andrew Cuomo will be running for reelection in 2022 Bill Deblasio’s successor will be elected in 2021. New Yorkers are stuck with the leaders they’ve elected for a while. And successful people tend not to change the things that have made them successful or that they think have made them successful so don’t expect them to change the way they operate.
I don’t know how going to the middle ground can satisfactorily solve situations that have wildly gotten out of hand. The indebtedness of our major, mostly democrat-run cities, was created by over-the-moon incompetence, an abundance of questionable social programs, and unabated abusive power exercised over a number of years. For instance, in Los Angeles a scandal is growing around developer payoffs to a powerful member of the city council,, with charges being brought against a lobbyist, and hints of involvement by Mayor Garcetti. This story is being handled quietly, as most newspapers do little investigative reporting on stories involving democrat corruption, leaving their poison keyboards mainly for perceived republican irregularities. Consequently, long term problems are usually dismissed, downplayed, or entirely covered up, remaining unaddressed by people voted in time and time again, having a tin ear hearing their constituents complaints, a blind eye to see problems, and a mouth ready to deliver excuses and bs.
I disagree about the incompetence. If Chicago is any gauge, they’re remarkably competent in achieving their objectives. I know of no alderman or state legislator who’s ever become impoverished through serving as alderman or state legislator. Quite to the contrary many have become quite wealthy. That’s a track record of success any manager could recognize.
As to whether enriching onesself, one’s family, or one’s associates should be the objective of elective office, that’s a different question but, as the lawyers say, res ipsa loquitur.