Zohran Mamdani’s Real-World Constraints

[Hentenza]

“Over the past 100 years or so, socialist experiments around the world unleashed a vast tide of tyranny, starvation, and mass murder on a scale never seen before in human history. Socialism was implemented in the Soviet Union, East Germany, Bulgaria, Hungary, Maoist China, Chavez-Maduro’s Venezuela, and other places. In every one of these places, it has failed. As American writer Joshua Muravchikobserves in his 2019 Wall Street Journal article on socialism, “It’s hard to think of another idea that has been tried and failed as many times in as many ways or at a steeper price in human suffering.”

Despite its demonstrated record of producing evils, however, the spirit of socialism is very much alive today even in the United States. According to a 2019 Gallup poll, as many as 49% of millennials and members of Gen Z (ages 18 to 39 in 2019) hold a favorable view of socialism. Socialists are fond of saying that socialism has not failed because real socialism has never been tried. In the eyes of today’s democratic socialists, the earlier socialist leaders failed because they were “authoritarian socialists” who believed in a strictly hierarchical, top-down bureaucracy and “perverted” socialism’s noble ideals—if, instead, our socialist government is led by public-spirited people whose beliefs are rooted in democratic principles, then we will achieve real socialism and all will be well. The problem, they argue, has never been the socialist horse, but the jockeys who rode it and led it astray.

This couldn’t be further from the truth. When today’s socialists talk about building a non-authoritarian socialist government rooted in democratic and humanitarian principles, they are far from original. In fact, that has always been what the earlier socialists said they would achieve. Aimed at improving the lot of the common people and creating a more egalitarian society, the early socialist movements emerged primarily as a reaction to the inhumane working conditions and yawning wealth disparities in industrialized Europe. Empowering working-class people, dismantling societal hierarchies, and ensuring a more equitable distribution of goods and services have always been among the many honorable objectives of socialist leaders. Socialist regimes have all ended in varying degrees of totalitarianism, to be sure, but there is no denying that earlier socialist leaders, just like today’s, generally started with good intentions.”

Yes, Real Socialism Has Been Tried—And It Has Failed Every Time

Over the past 100 years or so, socialist experiments around the world unleashed a vast tide of tyranny, starvation, and mass murder on a scale never seen before in human history. Socialism was impl…

www.thecornellreview.org

 

[FreeinChrist]

ADVISOR HAT

This thread has had a clean up. Please see this Admin Announcement that is linked to in the flaming rule:
​

Admin Announcement - A list of unacceptable nicknames

There continues to be problems with posters using labels and unpleasant nicknames for public figures and groups. As this has become an issue around the site, we are creating this list and attaching a link to the flaming rule. It is not meant to be all-inclusive and will be edited as needed. Do...

www.christianforums.com

Do not call either political party in the US or members thereof Fascist, or Socialist*, or Marxist or Communist. Do not call the leaders Hitler.​

​

Keep the discussion civil, which can't happen if one side refers to the other party as evil or immoral . ​

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Which of Mamdani's policies have NEVER been tried anywhere else in the world?

Y'all keep saying "iot's gonna fail" but the response will just be "Socialism always fails". Individual policies are not socialism and MANY individual policies work quite well. Like healthcare; fire fighting services.

I think some of the sticking points have to do with the ones that HAVE been tried before and haven't worked well:

Rent Control (I believe one of his pledges was to both strengthen and expand rent control, was it not?): That's been tried before, it didn't have the effect people were expecting/hoping for in the long run.

Two economists from opposing sides of the political spectrum, Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman (who identifies as an American liberal or European social democrat),[91] and Thomas Sowell, (who stated that "libertarian" might best describe his views)[92]: 1  have both criticized rent regulation as poor economics, which, despite its good intentions, leads to the creation of less housing, raises prices, and increases urban blight.[82]: 1 [93]: 4  [92]: 1  Writing in 1946, economists Milton Friedman and George J. Stigler said: "Rent ceilings, therefore, cause haphazard and arbitrary allocation of space, inefficient use of space, retardation of new construction and indefinite continuance of rent ceilings, or subsidization of new construction and a future depression in residential building."

-- it's one of the few economic topics where you'll find agreement between Paul Krugman and Milton Friedman.


As far as I know, the only previous domestic attempt at city-run grocery stores were in small rural areas that were declared "food deserts" because all of their private grocers had folded up shop. NYC isn't a small rural area, and it's by no means a food desert. They'd essentially be competing (with an unfair advantage) against existing private grocers (who already operate on thin profit margins).

Will government grocery stores work in New York City? A food supply chain expert weighs in

America has state liquor stores and military commissaries. But Northeastern University food supply expert John Lowrey says a proposal to establish government-run grocery stores in New York City would make it difficult for existing stores to compete.

phys.org

 

[rambot]

I think some of the sticking points have to do with the ones that HAVE been tried before and haven't worked well:

Rent Control (I believe one of his pledges was to both strengthen and expand rent control, was it not?): That's been tried before, it didn't have the effect people were expecting/hoping for in the long run.

Two economists from opposing sides of the political spectrum, Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman (who identifies as an American liberal or European social democrat),[91] and Thomas Sowell, (who stated that "libertarian" might best describe his views)[92]: 1  have both criticized rent regulation as poor economics, which, despite its good intentions, leads to the creation of less housing, raises prices, and increases urban blight.[82]: 1 [93]: 4  [92]: 1  Writing in 1946, economists Milton Friedman and George J. Stigler said: "Rent ceilings, therefore, cause haphazard and arbitrary allocation of space, inefficient use of space, retardation of new construction and indefinite continuance of rent ceilings, or subsidization of new construction and a future depression in residential building."

-- it's one of the few economic topics where you'll find agreement between Paul Krugman and Milton Friedman.

I know he has a few ideas of how to boost available housing. I'm not 100% sure I've heard him talk about rent control (though I am REALLY not following him that well).
IF I'm being honest, my guess is he is going to primarily focus on bringing down costs over other options. I also know he has plans to tax vacant apartments (Because developers would just rather let them sit empty then have to pay to improve them), which, as I recall reading, is in the 40,000 units range.
So if he does that along with rent control, perhaps it could force the property holders to sell some of their property (either to more financially secure concerns or, heaven forbid, a person who would want to purchase and live their themselves) OR to stop "warehousing" their units to keep prices high.

As far as I know, the only previous domestic attempt at city-run grocery stores were in small rural areas that were declared "food deserts" because all of their private grocers had folded up shop. NYC isn't a small rural area, and it's by no means a food desert. They'd essentially be competing (with an unfair advantage) against existing private grocers (who already operate on thin profit margins).

Will government grocery stores work in New York City? A food supply chain expert weighs in

America has state liquor stores and military commissaries. But Northeastern University food supply expert John Lowrey says a proposal to establish government-run grocery stores in New York City would make it difficult for existing stores to compete.

phys.org

For this, I wonder....in Saskatoon SK (Canada) they have created a "Food Bank grocery store". I wonder if this is what he's referring to.

For the record though, food deserts are 100% a thing in New York city. Just because there's a large population, doesn't mean there isn't scarcity. In high poverty locations, where food stores cannot afford to stay in business (likely due to theft if I'm guessing), they can't have

 

[ThatRobGuy]

For this, I wonder....in Saskatoon SK (Canada) they have created a "Food Bank grocery store". I wonder if this is what he's referring to.

For the record though, food deserts are 100% a thing in New York city. Just because there's a large population, doesn't mean there isn't scarcity. In high poverty locations, where food stores cannot afford to stay in business (likely due to theft if I'm guessing), they can't have

That would create a different set of challenges would it not?

If there's a food desert merely due to a private grocery store not being economically viable purely due to the ability to run at a profit, that would be quite different than a situation where a private grocer doesn't want to deal with the fallout from theft.

So are people who would steal from a private grocery store going to make the choice not to steal simply because the bread is $2.79, instead of $3.49?

I know he has a few ideas of how to boost available housing. I'm not 100% sure I've heard him talk about rent control (though I am REALLY not following him that well).
IF I'm being honest, my guess is he is going to primarily focus on bringing down costs over other options. I also know he has plans to tax vacant apartments (Because developers would just rather let them sit empty then have to pay to improve them), which, as I recall reading, is in the 40,000 units range.
So if he does that along with rent control, perhaps it could force the property holders to sell some of their property (either to more financially secure concerns or, heaven forbid, a person who would want to purchase and live their themselves) OR to stop "warehousing" their units to keep prices high.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/29/mamdanis-rent-freeze-promise-could-run-into-stark-financial-reality-00480794

These kinds of measures disincentivize both new development, as well as anyone being willing to roll the dice on the landlord game.

A landlord's costs aren't frozen, they're on the hook for repairs/upgrades, and rising costs for their end of the business. If the cost of everything else goes up by 5-7% over a period of 5 years, and they're not allowed to increase rents to offset some of that, they actually start losing money on their investment.

Keeping in mind, in NYC, not every unit is ran by some mega-conglomerate who has tons of profits laying around.

The "mom & pop landlords" (meaning landlords who own between 1 and 5 rental units) still control a fairly good sized chunk of NYC apartments.

However, if these measures get pushed through, I would imagine a lot of them will start selling to the "mega-corp" type landlords.