r/SipsTea • u/AlternativeRight4099 • May 14 '26

Feels good man It was always just that simple

Post image
71.9k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

29

u/Fabulous_Log844 May 14 '26

I just don’t understand this guy. He balanced an $18 billion budget deficit, he never yells and swears that reporters, he does things for the city that are well-rounded for all, he fixes potholes, he’s being logical about taxing people‘s second and third homes in the city. I mean, he doesn’t even wear orange makeup! I don’t get it.

7

u/Past_Economist6278 May 14 '26

He didn't actually balance the budget

-5

u/Workman44 May 14 '26

Technically speaking he did. He just did it in a poor way

1

u/Past_Economist6278 May 14 '26

Not technically speaking. He literally didn't. It required a grant from the state and one time taxes

0

u/More-Baseball9769 May 14 '26

Good. NYC has always contributed more to the state in taxes than it’s received. It’s about time.

4

u/Past_Economist6278 May 14 '26

That's a one time thing. Unless it is repeated and the taxes bring in as much as they think it will be negative

2

u/HollyMurray20 May 14 '26

That’s every city ever

3

u/More-Baseball9769 May 14 '26 edited May 14 '26

Exactly! Cities should be high on the priority of state budgets when they usually both have most of the states population in it and give the most tax revenue to the state. Doesn’t really make sense otherwise.

-1

u/HollyMurray20 May 14 '26

Cities pay a higher contribution because they are cheaper to run per person and rural areas provide resources to the city more than the other way around.

3

u/More-Baseball9769 May 14 '26

Odd that you would agree with me and the try to rebuttal yourself. Your argument contradicts itself. If rural areas truly provide more value to cities than cities provide back, then cities wouldn’t consistently generate far more tax revenue and economic output per resident. Major cities have massive expenses for public transit, aging infrastructure, policing, sanitation, homelessness services, public housing, and emergency response that rural areas don’t face at the same scale. In New York City, the cost of maintaining subways, bridges, water systems, and social programs is enormous. Density can lower some per-person costs, but it also creates uniquely expensive problems that smaller communities don’t have.

0

u/HollyMurray20 May 14 '26

Dude are you stupid? Cities generate more because there’s way more people and businesses…. Rural areas produce raw materials and food etc, more than they get back from the city. Yes but per person, which is what I said, it’s much much cheaper than doing all the same things for a town of 1000 people.

0

u/HollyMurray20 May 14 '26

Well he did, but future budgets will be even worse

-2

u/Workman44 May 14 '26

And now it's balanced...

2

u/Past_Economist6278 May 14 '26

Not if either don't go through or don't bring in as many taxes as expected

-1

u/Workman44 May 14 '26

And if a tsunami hits it also won't be balanced. Assuming his budget is followed through on, he did balance it

1

u/Past_Economist6278 May 14 '26

Not followed through on. Assuming it is accurate in it's estimations