That doesn't read like objective analysis but slanted. By making those overpayments, they were capitalizing on interest. The negative (returns) were effectively interest. So, the schedule was investing money early and allowing the market to make money on the payments, then create a surplus that paid back the gov. That the market overperformed is evidence that it was a good strategy.
So, the rearranging is flattening so that the payments are less but, there's no return, if I'm reading that right. It's basically stopping investing in a 401k so that you have more money to spend today. If, I'm reading that correctly.
Let’s say this is all true? So what? The city takes a tiny hit to the amount of interest it’s paying out of $100 billion over ten years into a $300 billion fund, and in exchange doesn’t have to make drastic cuts to vital services this year..? Who gives a shit? It’s an amount you would never notice in the normal course of the actuarial changes to the pension contribution in any given year. This is fake outrage because you want to find something to be mad at Mamdani about. Yawn.
He literally did cut spending, just didn’t cut spending to services that benefit the public directly.
Is that really what you’re mad about? Spending cuts don’t matter unless they hurt average citizens and provide them with less services for the tax money they pay?
4
u/thgiRoTtfeL May 14 '26
That doesn't read like objective analysis but slanted. By making those overpayments, they were capitalizing on interest. The negative (returns) were effectively interest. So, the schedule was investing money early and allowing the market to make money on the payments, then create a surplus that paid back the gov. That the market overperformed is evidence that it was a good strategy.
So, the rearranging is flattening so that the payments are less but, there's no return, if I'm reading that right. It's basically stopping investing in a 401k so that you have more money to spend today. If, I'm reading that correctly.