"Mayor Zohran Mamdani unveiled a whopping $124.7 billion executive budget for New York City on Tuesday – built on the back of $4 billion in funny money from Gov. Kathy Hochul.
The governor’s bailout – announced hours before the city budget’s reveal – was quickly criticized as a fiction used to help out her reluctant ally Mamdani as she faces re-election and pressure to appease the lefty mayor’s comrades."
New York State imposes a graduated income tax with rates ranging from 4.00% to 10.90%, depending on income levels. Additionally, there is a state sales tax rate of 4.00%
Tell me Vic. What should the state spend this money on? Maybe the Governor needs a new ballroom?
No, the city, NYC, finances (pays for) almost the whole state. The fact is that Mamdani has the leadership skills and popular support to get things done. He is The New LaGuardia. Deal with it...
The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), a group of corporate lobbyists and legislators who meet behind closed doors, has spent decades pushing far-right legislation that endangers our democracy. ALEC and the corporate sponsors who fund the group are behind dozens of dangerous bills, including racist voter ID laws, rollbacks of environmental protections, and more. ALEC creates “model bills” that undermine our rights, then have state lawmakers introduce them almost word-for-word as real legislation that often becomes law, weakening our democracy and enriching ALEC’s corporate donors at our expense.
Not all Americans have heard of “ALEC,” the American Legislative Exchange Council, but every American is living under some of the “model” laws secretly pre-voted on by corporate lobbyists voting as equals with state legislators behind closed doors through this powerful special interest group. ALEC has undermined Americans’ civil rights, civil liberties, and human rights in numerous ways.
ALEC leaders served on the advisory board of Project 2025 and played an active role in shaping its blueprint for a second Trump administration.
Yes it is. But I do not understand the problem. The meme, leading the discussion, is celebrating a metric of 'good governance' used in the Economic Outlook report I linked.
I also don't understand how citing biased critiques of ALEC refutes the Economic Outlook report. The claims made by those biased sources are tainted by their own embedded biases. The critiques rely upon a competition between biases to push facts, data, and objective metrics out of the discussion.
Just because ALEC does not conform to a preferred bias doesn't invalidate the Economic Outlook report.
The issue is more complicated than what is being presented. When I asked Google AI, this:
Which states are the takers and which are the givers
This was the answer:
The Giver (Donor) States
These states generally have higher per-capita incomes, meaning their residents pay more in federal income taxes. They also tend to have fewer residents eligible for federal poverty-relief programs. [ 1 , 2 ]
New Jersey: Residents receive roughly \(\$0.75\) to \(\$0.82\) for every dollar they pay in taxes.
Connecticut: Residents see a return of about \(\$0.74\) per tax dollar.
Massachusetts: Highly dependent on income levels, residents get roughly \(\$0.83\) back per dollar paid.
New York: Consistently one of the top contributors, getting back roughly \(\$0.86\) per tax dollar.
Other Givers: Illinois , Washington , and Minnesota . [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]
The Taker (Recipient) States
These states typically have lower average household incomes, larger elderly populations utilizing Social Security and Medicare, or heavy federal and military infrastructure. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]
New Mexico: High reliance on federal aid, with over \(30\%\) of the state budget typically coming from federal grants.
West Virginia & Kentucky: Heavily dependent on federal funds, with some studies showing returns of over \(\$2.30\) in federal spending for every tax dollar paid.
Mississippi: Historically has the highest poverty rate in the nation, making it a heavy recipient of federal welfare and medical subsidies.
Other Takers: Alaska , Alabama , and Virginia (due to heavy concentrations of defense and federal jobs). [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]
Note: While many of the wealthiest, donor states lean politically blue, and many higher-poverty, recipient states lean red, these dynamics are primarily shaped by local economic factors, demographics, and real estate values rather than political party control. [ 1 , 2 ]
The issue is more complicated than what is being presented. When I asked Google AI, this:
I do not dispute the Google AI result. But Gavin Newsom and Zohran Mamdani are not Federal officials. Their stated accomplishments are not Federal accomplishments.
The Economic Outlook report, published by ALEC, (that I linked above) is a ranking based upon metrics of state governance.
And the celebrated accomplishments by Gov. Newsom and Mayor Mamdani are typically associated with the Republican Party's rhetoric concerning fiscal responsibility than the Democratic Party's rhetoric of social responsibility.
The meme, (at the top) that leads the discussion, is attempting to portray that these 'Blue' cities and states are beating Republicans at their own game. While that claim is debatable (for the reasons you cited from Google AI), it is not about the Federal government.
It's a nice meme, but here is the reality according to Google AI
Is the following true?
Mamdani just closed NYC's $12 billion deficit without raising property taxes. Newsom just balanced California's $350 billion budget through 2028. Meanwhile red states are busy gerrymandering and redrawing voting maps because they know their policies can't win a fair fight.
The specific claims regarding the New York City and California budgets are mostly true based on recent May 2026 executive proposals, though both rely on distinct financial maneuvers rather than permanent structural fixes. The claim about "red states" is a subjective political argument regarding ongoing national battles over redistricting. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]
New York City Budget (Mayor Zohran Mamdani)
The Claim: Mamdani closed a $12 billion deficit without raising property taxes .
The Reality: On May 12, 2026, Mayor Zohran Mamdani released a $124.7 billion Executive Budget that successfully brought an inherited $12 billion deficit down to zero. As claimed, it killed a previously proposed 9.5% property tax hike.
The Context: Financial watchdogs note the gap was closed using a mix of permanent revenue and short-term maneuvers. This includes taxing the rich via a new state "pied-à-terre" tax on luxury second homes, securing $8 billion in state assistance from Albany, and saving $2.3 billion by pushing back public pension fund payment timelines. Critics argue that shifting these obligations means a fiscal reckoning is delayed until 2028. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]
California Budget (Governor Gavin Newsom)
The Claim: Newsom balanced California's $350 billion budget through 2028.
The Reality: On May 14, 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom unveiled his final revised state budget , a nearly $350 billion spending plan. The proposal eliminates the current structural deficit, balancing the books with a projected "$0 deficit" through July 2028.
The Context: While the budget eliminates deficits for the next two fiscal years, it is a delicate balance. Revenue surged by $16.5 billion over prior estimates due to a booming tech sector and artificial intelligence investments. However, keeping the deficit at zero through 2028 relies on $1.8 billion in spending cuts—such as reinstating senior asset tests and raising premiums for undocumented immigrants on Medi-Cal—along with billions in corporate tax credit limits. The state still forecasts a return to structural deficits starting in the 2028–29 fiscal year. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]
Gerrymandering and Voting Maps
The Claim: Red states are redrawing voting maps because their policies cannot win a fair fight.
The Reality: This part of the statement moves from financial fact to political opinion and rhetoric. Gerrymandering—the practice of drawing legislative district boundaries to favor one political party—is a continuous, highly litigated reality in American politics.
The Context: Both major parties utilize redistricting to their advantage where they hold power. While progressive groups frequently sue Republican-led states (such as Texas, Florida, or Georgia) over maps they argue dilute minority voting power or suppress competition, conservative groups similarly target Democratic-led states (like New York or Maryland) for partisan map-drawing. The assertion that these policies "can't win a fair fight" is a common partisan talking point rather than an objective, verifiable fact. [ 1 , 2 ]
I asked, so do both fiscal plans amount to simply kicking the can down the road?
Yes, fiscal watchdogs and budget analysts largely agree that both plans heavily rely on "kicking the can down the road" to achieve their short-term "balanced" headlines. While both leaders technically met their legal obligations to present balanced budgets, they did so using accounting maneuvers, temporary state bailouts, and volatile tax windfalls that delay systemic structural reckonings rather than solving them. [ 1 , 2 ]
Here is exactly how both plans push the financial pain into the future:
New York City: The Definition of Pushing Costs Forward
Independent watchdogs like the Citizens Budget Commission heavily criticized Mayor Mamdani’s proposal, labeling it a "half-sour" budget because it masks deep future deficits with immediate accounting tricks. [ 1 ]
The Pension Restructuring Gimmick: Mamdani’s single biggest deficit-closing move is pushing $2.3 billion in public pension fund obligations years down the line. This does not save the city money; it drastically increases long-term debt by forcing future generations to pay for current retirements.
Draining the Cushions: To avoid immediate service cuts or broad tax hikes, the plan drains vital city reserve funds down to a legal minimum of $100 million. Experts warn this leaves NYC utterly exposed to any immediate economic downturn or recession.
The Upcoming 2028 Cliff: Because the budget relies on a massive $8 billion temporary cash injection from the state government, the structural deficit is not gone. NYC is already projecting a massive $7 billion deficit for fiscal year 2028 that will need to be dealt with almost immediately. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]
California: Saved by an AI Boom, but Structural Deficits Remain [ 1 , 2 ]
Governor Newsom's "zero deficit through 2028" looks great on paper, but the state's independent Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) has warned for years that California is trapped in a loop of temporary fixes. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]
Riding a Volatile Revenue Wave: California’s sudden budget rebound was fueled by an unpredictable $16.5 billion surge in tax revenue driven almost entirely by the booming tech sector and artificial intelligence stock market gains. This does not fix the state's structural problem: an extreme over-reliance on wealthy capital gains, which crash violently during market downturns.
Internal Borrowing & Suspensions: To achieve the 2028 baseline, California continues to utilize internal budgetary borrowing and the suspension of corporate tax credits. This delays necessary ongoing reductions in spending.
The Deficit Returns in 2029: Newsom's administration openly acknowledges that this plan only cuts the state's long-term operating imbalance "by half". The state is still projecting a return to structural deficits immediately following the 2028 expiration date. [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]
In short, both executives have utilized a combination of booming short-term economic variables and creative accounting shifts to navigate politically sensitive election and budget cycles, ensuring that the real structural corrections will have to be dealt with by future administrations. [ 1 , 2 ]
Memes are not reality and it is best to seek the truth before relying on and perpetuating them, IMHO.
The rest is just trying to explain the fineprint that may not be as black and white as the meme makes it sound.
Indeed, that is my point. It is certainly true that both administrations have made claims that they are balancing the budget or eliminating the deficit, but understanding what is really behind those claims is infinitely more important than the claims themselves.
Reagan's quote is talking about political rhetoric and campaign strategy in general, and how a politician's use of lengthy logical explanations, or painting the whole picture, can often lose them their audience. The meme that is the subject of this article is a perfect example. It is a gross oversimplification designed to conceal the truth beneath the claims in hopes that people will fail to dig deeper before accepting it as a truth and/or a reason to vote for these candidates. A classic campaign strategy that has worked for decades and not to the advantage of the people who are deceived by it mind you. If either of these two politicians were challenged to explain their claims in this situation, then as Reagan suggested, they would likely lose. With all due respect to the late President Reagan, I (not being a politician scrambling to win an election or advance my career) would rather know the truth when it comes to political claims and I don't give a shit if it causes the politician I favor to lose. Insist on the truth, full disclosure, and let the chips fall where they may.
Like LaGuardia Mamdani is a good leader and like Clinton he knows that budgets can be balanced when politicians have the guts to balance them. LEADERSHIP! New York City has always accomplished what naysayers and do nothings said was impossible. The fact is that contrary to what lamebrains say New York and California are doing great because they provide the services citizens need and want. Mayor Mamdani is doing that and it really pisses a lot of people off...
Because if they did they would just be your run of the mill shithole blue utopias.
Riiiight. Because the red States are the most dependent on the federal government, that somehow makes the blue States "shitholes". Are we "shitholes" because we have to keep bailing out the bankrupt lazy bigoted red States? Or is it because blue States welcome lgtbq and other minority Americans into our cities, homes and lives that make us supposed "shitholes"?
Personally, I believe most red States are shitholes, that's my opinion and its actually got some data to back it up. High poverty rates are a good indication of how broke a State is.
Here are the top 10 States with the highest poverty rates:
Of course, some like to pretend that beautiful States and beautiful cities like San Francisco are somehow "shitholes" because of stories of homelessness that the poverty-stricken bigots hear about, but let's face it, they're never going to visit San Francisco, and the millions of who do live in the bay area and love it don't need them anyway. So, if it makes some angry red-in-the-face MAGAite happy to believe California and the other blue States are somehow worse off than the broke ass red States, that's fine, we'll be okay without the red States, though clearly the same cannot be said of them.
Meanwhile back in reality, and contrary to what MAGA say here...
"Mayor Zohran Mamdani unveiled a whopping $124.7 billion executive budget for New York City on Tuesday – built on the back of $4 billion in funny money from Gov. Kathy Hochul.
The governor’s bailout – announced hours before the city budget’s reveal – was quickly criticized as a fiction used to help out her reluctant ally Mamdani as she faces re-election and pressure to appease the lefty mayor’s comrades."
Hochul forks over another $4B to bail out Mamdani’s NYC budget woes as she faces intense election pressure
New York State imposes a graduated income tax with rates ranging from 4.00% to 10.90%, depending on income levels. Additionally, there is a state sales tax rate of 4.00%
Tell me Vic. What should the state spend this money on? Maybe the Governor needs a new ballroom?
No, the city, NYC, finances (pays for) almost the whole state. The fact is that Mamdani has the leadership skills and popular support to get things done. He is The New LaGuardia. Deal with it...
that guy got into office with 3 strikes already against him in the eyes of maga christo-fascists ...
What's good for government often does not trickle down to constituents. Why do 'Blue states' measure their health by only government?
Here's another ranking.
California ranks 47th. New York is at the very bottom with a ranking of 50th.
Your source is an ALEC report.
Yes it is. But I do not understand the problem. The meme, leading the discussion, is celebrating a metric of 'good governance' used in the Economic Outlook report I linked.
I also don't understand how citing biased critiques of ALEC refutes the Economic Outlook report. The claims made by those biased sources are tainted by their own embedded biases. The critiques rely upon a competition between biases to push facts, data, and objective metrics out of the discussion.
Just because ALEC does not conform to a preferred bias doesn't invalidate the Economic Outlook report.
The economys of New York and California are booming! They are so rich and so dynamic they defy rightwing orthodoxy...
Nerm and Jbb,
The issue is more complicated than what is being presented. When I asked Google AI, this:
This was the answer:
Nomo Cuomos
Having lived in WA my entire life, I can confirm this.
I do not dispute the Google AI result. But Gavin Newsom and Zohran Mamdani are not Federal officials. Their stated accomplishments are not Federal accomplishments.
The Economic Outlook report, published by ALEC, (that I linked above) is a ranking based upon metrics of state governance.
And the celebrated accomplishments by Gov. Newsom and Mayor Mamdani are typically associated with the Republican Party's rhetoric concerning fiscal responsibility than the Democratic Party's rhetoric of social responsibility.
The meme, (at the top) that leads the discussion, is attempting to portray that these 'Blue' cities and states are beating Republicans at their own game. While that claim is debatable (for the reasons you cited from Google AI), it is not about the Federal government.
It's a nice meme, but here is the reality according to Google AI
I asked, so do both fiscal plans amount to simply kicking the can down the road?
From your AI search:
The rest is just trying to explain the fineprint that may not be as black and white as the meme makes it sound.
Indeed, that is my point. It is certainly true that both administrations have made claims that they are balancing the budget or eliminating the deficit, but understanding what is really behind those claims is infinitely more important than the claims themselves.
Reagan's quote is talking about political rhetoric and campaign strategy in general, and how a politician's use of lengthy logical explanations, or painting the whole picture, can often lose them their audience. The meme that is the subject of this article is a perfect example. It is a gross oversimplification designed to conceal the truth beneath the claims in hopes that people will fail to dig deeper before accepting it as a truth and/or a reason to vote for these candidates. A classic campaign strategy that has worked for decades and not to the advantage of the people who are deceived by it mind you. If either of these two politicians were challenged to explain their claims in this situation, then as Reagan suggested, they would likely lose. With all due respect to the late President Reagan, I (not being a politician scrambling to win an election or advance my career) would rather know the truth when it comes to political claims and I don't give a shit if it causes the politician I favor to lose. Insist on the truth, full disclosure, and let the chips fall where they may.
"Economics is just math" - Bill Clinton
Like LaGuardia Mamdani is a good leader and like Clinton he knows that budgets can be balanced when politicians have the guts to balance them. LEADERSHIP! New York City has always accomplished what naysayers and do nothings said was impossible. The fact is that contrary to what lamebrains say New York and California are doing great because they provide the services citizens need and want. Mayor Mamdani is doing that and it really pisses a lot of people off...
most everybody knows what really pisses maga scum off about this guy ...
‘Why Can't Red States Be More Like California And New York?’
Because if they did they would just be your run of the mill shithole blue utopias.
No one sane in a red state wants tjat
Riiiight. Because the red States are the most dependent on the federal government, that somehow makes the blue States "shitholes". Are we "shitholes" because we have to keep bailing out the bankrupt lazy bigoted red States? Or is it because blue States welcome lgtbq and other minority Americans into our cities, homes and lives that make us supposed "shitholes"?
Most & Least Federally Dependent States in 2026
Personally, I believe most red States are shitholes, that's my opinion and its actually got some data to back it up. High poverty rates are a good indication of how broke a State is.
Here are the top 10 States with the highest poverty rates:
Of course, some like to pretend that beautiful States and beautiful cities like San Francisco are somehow "shitholes" because of stories of homelessness that the poverty-stricken bigots hear about, but let's face it, they're never going to visit San Francisco, and the millions of who do live in the bay area and love it don't need them anyway. So, if it makes some angry red-in-the-face MAGAite happy to believe California and the other blue States are somehow worse off than the broke ass red States, that's fine, we'll be okay without the red States, though clearly the same cannot be said of them.
Now break it down by demographic and even ideology if that is available
why don't you do that and get back to us with the data you find important. maybe get some AI going. have fun.