'I’m depressed and sad': Wall Street melts down over NYC mayoral contest upset
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A number of Wall Street bankers, executives and hedge fund managers expressed panic and disbelief Wednesday after the upset victory of Zohran Mamdani, a self-described democratic socialist, in the New York City mayoral Democratic primary election Tuesday night.
“I’m depressed and sad,” said Rick Sandler, who runs the Midtown Manhattan hedge fund Eminence Capital, speaking with The Wall Street Journal . “If Mamdani becomes mayor, I will likely move my business and family out of New York.”
What began as an 11-person race to lead the Democratic Party ticket ultimately became a showdown between Mamdani and Andrew Cuomo, the former governor of New York who resigned amid sexual harassment allegations .
Mamdani has run a progressive campaign, pledging to implement rent freezes, build more public housing, increase taxes on the city’s wealthiest residents, launch city-owned grocery stores and raise the minimum wage to $30 an hour by 2030, among other initiatives.
Voters reacted positively to Mamadani’s campaign Tuesday, granting him 43.5% of the vote share to Cuomo’s 36.4% in the first round of ranked-choice voting. To Wall Street’s elite, however, Mamdani’s agenda has only sparked fear, and in some, depression.
“I was a bit depressed when I woke up this morning,” wrote Bill Ackman, the billionaire hedge fund manager and founder of Pershing Square Capital management and strong ally to President Donald Trump, on X Wednesday, formally known as Twitter.
Others took aim at Mamdani’s agenda, labeling it as socialism and communism.
“I can’t believe I even need to say this, but socialism doesn’t work,” said Anthony Pompliano, CEO of the bitcoin-focused financial services company Professional Capital Management, speaking to The Wall Street Journal . “It has failed in every American city it was tried.”
Despite no American city in history having enacted a socialist economic policy, which would mandate full employee ownership of all means of production, Wall Street financiers continued to voice fears of New York City transforming into a communist takeover.
“It’s officially hot commie summer,” wrote Daniel Loeb, co-founder of the hedge fund Third Point, which as of last year managed approximately $11.5 billion in assets , on X Wednesday.
While Mamdani came out on top on the Democratic primary election night, because he failed to receive more than 50% of the vote, additional rounds of ranked-choice voting will take place over the coming weeks, though with his strong lead, Mamdani is expected to ultimately secure the nomination.
He will still have to compete in the general election come November, however, where he’ll not only face off against the Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa , but also incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, this time running as an independent, and potentially Cuomo, who hasn’t ruled out a November run as an independent.
Tags
Who is online
245 visitors
Heaven forbid anyone try and deprive hedge fund managers of anything.
Heaven forbid we expect people to pay their own way without stealing from the more successful.
We hear all the time about how socialists destroy businesses with their progressive programs and their taxes. This will likely destroy the hedge fund business. Everyone will quit their jobs as hedge fund managers and go to work at McDonalds.
/s
No......they will just move out of New York.
Just as unlikely.
Stephen Miller, the single least persuasive argument for the supremacy of Caucasian genes currently living, perhaps the most advanced premature aging case in the scientific record, that ugly unfuckable puddle of dog vomit, is whining about how “unchecked migration fundamentally remade the NYC electorate” and “Democrats change politics by changing voters.” (In New York City, which we guess was a whites-only country club in Stephen’s head until recently.)
That's a peek into rightwing conservatives' true motives. It's not about "illegals" as they call them, it about "unchecked migration" aka legal immigrants coming here but not being "checked" by the existing white conservative population. Otherwise, why would it remake the "NYC electorate"? Undocumented immigrants don't get a vote, they don't get to run for office, they cannot change the electorate without becoming citizens. It's the 55+ million Hispanic legal immigrants that scare the shit out of white rightwing conservatives, not that some undocumented immigrant might take a field worker position from an American worker. You don't see a mob of white day laborers out at the local farms fighting for those jobs. You do see the videos of white conservatives screaming at Latino Americans who dared to speak Spanish around them. It's clear this isn't about whether someone is here legally or not, it's a white conservative cultural war against Hispanics in general with a massive racist underbelly conservatives usually work hard to conceal but it they can't always help themselves.
Woman caught on video yelling racist remarks at Spanish-speaking mother in Disneyland bathroom
Video: Woman lashes out at Mexican restaurant manager for speaking Spanish | Daily Mail Online
'You’re in America': Woman Berates Latino Parkgoers for Playing Spanish Music at Wisconsin Park - YouTube
I saw a short video on twitter this morning of a 60 ish white man telling two brown skinned people walking past him as he sat on a park bench that he wanted to see their id's. Naturally they told him to get lost and then an argument ensued. He's probably lucky these two young people didnt beat the shit out of him .
I'm glad they didn't, it would likely be used to justify white conservatives hate for Hispanics and further embolden their attacks on our fellow Latino Americans.
The problem they never like to acknowledge is that "progressive" policies like this require forced compliance from people who simply don't have to stick around.
So the people who have to stick around should suffer because they have to stick around?
Should people who have A LOT of money be given veto power over government policies ?
No, but they shouldn't have to pay for the votes that politicians try to use their money to buy. they can vote with their feet, leaving NY even more of a shithole with nobody to pick up the tab for the free ride promised to the takers.
It's a free country. People can always move wherever. Our history is the constant story of families relocating for better economic opportunities.
In practical terms, we all have our own individual "veto power". If you don't like what's happening in your city or state, you can move.
We've seen a major migration away from high tax, high regulation jurisdictions. If they implement the policies Mamdani advocates, that will accelerate.
Early indicator of..............well you know the rest.
Change it up a bit to "I owe my soul to the NYC store". New official NYC song should he win?
He needs to hook up with AOC. And Bernie can be the best man.
Not sure you know what the phrase "company store" means.
The hell I don't.
If you did you wouldnt use that line as a comparison.
City owned grocery stores. Trapped to shop just like the miners were.
Do we prosecute shoplifters? or is okay because they are stealing from themselves?
It's okay, just goes on their ledger.
No. More like a company owns the store, and very likely, most or all of the whole town, as well.
The coal companies owned everything in the town that included the housing. If you didn't work in the mines you had to find a place to live. I grew up in coal country. My grampap used to talk about the company store and how you could only purchase stuff with company script
And ....................you don't see a correlation? If the city owns them or even operates them, how much different is that than the company store of the coal mining days? Had to start somewhere.
You point out some of the main differences between a company town/ company store and what is proposed for New York.
At least in theory his idea for NY is the opposite of a company store
No one will be forced to buy from a city owned grocery store, and the difference in prices likely wouldnt be dramatic enough for people who could afford to buy groceries at the usual stores to switch.
Company stores were monopolies that could thus raise prices.
exactly
I used to live in a neighborhood in Chicago where there were two fairly large grocery stores less than a half mile from each other. One store was budget oriented and had a complete, although not overly so, produce department, and sold less then perfect looking vegetables from a bargain bin. Had a section of the refrigerated foods aisle dedicated to discounted overstocked items at or nearing expiration date, and had a lot of generic food products on their shelves , although they also sold mostly brand name stuff like any store does.
The other store down the street was much more upscale, with gourmet brands , pricey spices , a very large selection of cheeses , and a case dedicated to fresh herbs.
Both stores were successful and rarely did the twain meet in terms of clientele. People who shopped at the pricier more exclusive grocery store wouldnt want to lower themselves to be seen shopping at the lower class store. And the people who shopped at the "lower class" store couldnt often afford to do much shopping at the other one.
Who actually believes the government can deliver cheaper food than an industry that already runs on a 1% profit margin? Because they should not be allowed to vote.
Won't these policies require approval of the city council? It's not like the Mayor of NYC is an elected dictator
The NYC Council:
(2017 est) [ 4 ]
New York City Council - Wikipedia
Maybe Staten Island can secede and call their new government MSIGA.
Chinese, Russian and Serbian gazillionaires in those gilded fortresses high in NYC's sky can afford to pay a lot more. Cry me a river...
What a bunch of snowflakes.
I know, how sad that they want to keep the money they earn instead of supporting a bunch of worthless takers.
If the "takers", as you call them, weren't working, there would be no income for the nameless "They" of your post.
Why don't you go sit in a corner and think about how many times you have been helped in your lifetime. You are helped every day by people whom you do not know and probably do not even realize that they are helping you.
In the very small world of your commentary, there exists a very small spark of something that if nurtured, could grow into something very large and and bright, but is smothered by the zero-sum calculus of "It is mine!"
I am sorry. Do better. It really isn't that hard.
Takers are only entitled to what they earn, they aren’t entitled to other peoples money. We need to stop democrats from buying votes through theft.
What do you know about what people earn? Is there some objective standard to measure the merit of what people acquire? Or do the ends justify the means?
Define "Earn" and "Worth" as you see them.
How is an individuals worth calculated?
We are about to undergo a massive shift downward in earning potential due to AI. Will millions of white collar jobs disappearing over the next 10 years affect your calculations of worth?
NO, it will not, if you are a idiot your worth is less, so you earn less. asking if you want to supersize that is not a career. being on public aid used to be humiliating, now it is a lifestyle.
You should not be able to vote yourself a raise by stealing from the more successful because they made better life choices.
Life choices do have an effect on ones earning potential, but so can situations outside of ones control.
I used to style my life around the theories espoused by Ayn Rand in "The Objectivist Ethics" and her several novels. Then I graduated high school and had to live.
Good for you, i worked with lots of people over the years, I studied, took classes while they drank and partied on the weekends, I raised my value to future employers, they are still laborers who will die laborers. It's not life, it's the fucked up choices people make.
I think you may have that a bit backward in this case. The means (that one chooses) justify the ends. No effort, no reward
The fact that this is considered to be an argument is SO stupid it is offensive. We live in a capitalist economy, in such an economy there will always be "winners and losers", that is the nature of it and well, the plan. Capitalism succeeds by paying labor as little as possible for their work.
But whether one makes a little or a lot they need to eat, they need to have their kids educated , and they need the freedom to move about in the world. And in America they need a big screen tv and a smartphone. Big business recognizes all of this , so why dont you guys.
The biggest proponents of giving out "free money" to everyone during covid were the giant retailers who needed for everyone to have the ability to buy their most mainstream everyday goods.
A social safety net is the cost of a capitalist economy.
The rich should just pay it and shut the fuck up.
Effort comes in many forms and can be measured many different ways. The monetary reward for effort therefore is often not closely connected to effort. Unfortunately, there is a subset of our society that measures the worth of a person by how much money they have.
It is sometimes the decisions that one makes, but quite often it is much, much more. I say this not to discount hard work and hustle, but because there are many factors that a person deals with that affect both societal and (I will call it) numerical worth or wealth.
Take the family unit for example. Does one parent stay home? Is that even an option? Do the parent or parents have stable support? Does the parent(s) have time to attend classes or are they, due to life, compelled to work? These and many other questions can arise that are not necessarily related to the choices that one has made but are still choices that one must make due to the circumstances of life.
Everything you just described is a life choice, you are responsible for those choices.
You choose to have children that may not be able to afford, Am i responsible for you choice?
Again, why are you having kids? Choice. Abortion is legal in many states, choose to go there and fix your mistake.
Circumstances of life are an excuses.
I am going to assume that your use of "you" is in the collective sense.
Everything I described above is not necessarily a choice that one makes while afforded the luxury of foresight. The world seldom asks if one is prepared to take on the various curves that life throws their way.
Shit happens to the best of us. If you are seriously asking that question, my answer would be that everyone in society is responsible for all others in that society. That is what makes it a society and not just a group of people. If one doesn't like the society, then hopefully one is free to leave that society and go to another more of their liking. Feel free at any time to do so.
What if one is against abortion for religious or other reasons? What gives one the right to compel another into undergoing an abortion? What gives anyone the authority to compel the choices that someone else makes? It is not much of a choice if you are compelled to make it, is it?
The nature of the plan is for "winners", "big winners" and "major winners".
No. It doesn't. That's ignorant. That's only the view people who have never employed anyone project onto those of us who have.
I don't see big business giving all that away.
It's a safety net, not a hammock.
Choices determine to what degree you make the best of your situation. Not all situations are the same.
All too often in these discussions, conservatives don't want to acknowledge that some people find themselves in situations where the very best decisions will still leave them in need of public assistance and liberals don't want to acknowledge that there are huge numbers of people who simply need to make better decisions.
As you said above, a safety net not a hammock. and too many people use the victim card to justfy stealing from others and one party has mainstreamed it for political power.
Yeah. But that's not all of them. We've got a lot of good folks who for whatever reason aren't able to provide for themselves.
A couple of years ago I met a young woman who retired from military service at 28 to come home and take care of her bed-ridden, quadriplegic 30 year old sister. Their parents had passed away, and the girl needs round the clock care. They are on public assistance.
So yeah... there needs to be some hard conversations about "we're tired of paying for you to be a dumbass", but there are also some hard conversations needed about "not everybody getting help is a dumbass".
The elite hedge fund class really fear that the proposed policies are popular and will work toward stabilizing the middle class and help the poor.
If wealthy people cared about creating a better city or eliminating poverty they could easily do it.
They peddle political influence by funding politicians that will hand the wealthy these massive tax cuts. Yet wages stay stagnant and poverty abounds.
History has proven over and over when poverty becomes overwhelming, people cannot afford basic lives, housing, food, heating and basic necessities, the people rise up.
When you take the name "socialist" out of a poll and simply poll questions based on actual policy proposals, every time the people choose "socialist" "progressive" or "liberal" policies.
America should not be a country ruled by the wealthy.
Stop believing anything is going to trickle down. The fear mongering over "socialism" is just to keep up a failed status quo with nothing but trickle down promises that never ever happen. People are tired of it.
No. They just know it won't work.
Too much opposition.
The fault is not in our stars, dear Brutus.
well said
Them that has the gold and jewels, rules. It's always been that way.
Elect him …. Next …… last person in NYC …… turn out the lights
If anyone thinks this socialist/communistic approach to governing will benefit the working class and the poor of NYC are out of their minds.
The very rich, including hedge fund managers, have the means to move all their assets to more favorable environments. That includes moving or shedding employees and no longer patronizing local businesses. Socialism has never worked for the little guy anywhere it's been tried. The progressive still haven't figured this out.