Why this was flagged? Censorship in HN is rampant
I think this article is deeply flawed to the point of being absurd.
I do not think it is a good article. Quite a few posts indicate the flaws.
Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
121–130 of 137 posts
Re: Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
17 states have government owned stores, it's common across the US. They sell liquor and in some states they also sell groceries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholic_beverage_control_sta... On policing, Urban Alchemy is the company that was contracted in SF. Having worked directly with Urban Alchemy for years in LA, their staff are severly underqualified and 95% of the time will do nothing once arriving on site. T…
Government owned liquor stores were put in place because the free market was too good at supplying people with liquor, and governments wanted to put restrictions and guardrails around people's access to it. Is that the case with groceries?
Yeah we have state liquor stores in NH and they are much more expensive[1] than driving down to Massachusetts and going to total wine. The point of the stores is not to supply people in the Shire with liquor for cheaper. It's to make it more expensive and then use the profits to fund the state.
It's so thoroughly different in goals from the NYC plan that I'm in awe people would conflate them.
[1] For example Seven Deadly Zins wine is $19 in NH, currently very on sale for $13. Or its just $11.49 at Total Wine in Mass without any sale at all! Ketel One vodka is $38 in NH, or $28 in Mass.
Re: Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
#123No, Europeans will recognize NYC's policies as normal, Zohran or not. Afterall, It's one of America's only European-ish cities. NYC has subsidized world-class transit, rent-stabilization, high taxes and free-childcare. Pretty European. Zohran is classic of case of 'the dose makes the poison'. Instead of subsidized buses, he wants free buses. Instead of rent-stabilization, he wants rent freezes. He wants to increase a…
> But for some reason, democratic socialists refuse to engage with the book earnestly. You're not as informed as you think you are, probably because you're not an NYC resident and have no actual stake in this election. We successfully passed 3 ballot proposals that reduce regulation and review time for building certain housing units. Mamdani voted for all 3 also. More deregulation is needed and expected under Mamdani…
Not sure why you make that assumption. In fact, I live in NYC and that's exactly where I see the abundance vs dem-soc tensions. This includes friends who were early canvassers for Zohran. It includes Zohran's loudest public supporters such as Mehdi Hasan and Hasan Piker. I have listened to hours of long-form interviews by Zohran. I am admittedly a sceptic, but I have earned my right to this skepticism.
I know that Mamdani is more than the 4 policies he's championed as part of his social media campaign. But, he has championed those 4 policies a disproportionate amount - free buses, free childcare, freeze rent, raise taxes. A man must be judged by what he says. I judge him by what he says the loudest.
______
For your side rant, I don't agree. New builds in gentrified neighborhoods aren't perfect, but they're significantly better than the brick kilns that came before them. I've crashed at friends houses in Gowanus before the gentrification boom, and it was miserable.
Williamsburg & Bushwick should be seen as a triumph. It went from a dilapidated industrial zone where my friends dad 'got beat up by gang members when he was growing up' and now it is the thriving center of the American hipster movement. Domino Park is triumph. It is noticeably better maintained than parks elsewhere in NYC, and that's thanks to the public-private partnerships.
New build units aren't affordable because those are the only new builds coming up. When supply is low, there is no govt intervention that can give a good outcome to the majority. If those builds hadn't come up, prices would've gone up further in other places or worse, people would have moved out of the city. It's a math problem. People need homes. There aren't enough homes.
That's the whole point of abundance.
There is no such thing as an affordable & scarce resource. It doesn't matter is the scarcity comes from over-regulation or impractical building costs. You can artificially make it affordable by rationing it to the lucky few. But, its limited availability means that a small group gets all the benefits (see classical rent control in NYC) while the majority in the same socio-economic class is left subsidizing their life style.
I can give real examples.
Take Chicago for instance. New affordable housing is more expensive than market rate housing due to over-regulation. [1]
Take Austin. It reduced regulation and zoning rules. Rents went down. [2]
Take Amsterdam, Rent control has taken a bulk of apartments off the housing market, making new builds eye-wateringly expensive. [3]
[1] https://blockclubchicago.org/2025/07/28/why-is-it-so-expensi...
[2] https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd....
_______
I concede that Mamdani may still endorse a de-regulatory policies. However, the left has historically leaned pro-regulation. I will maintain this prior until proven wrong. I desperately want to be proven wrong, because I want to continue living in NYC. If Mamdani had gone around saying Rezone, Deregulate and Build, then I would have expressed confidence. But he has been quite evasive about these policies when asked by various interviewers over hours of listening to him.
Re: Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
#124No, Europeans will recognize NYC's policies as normal, Zohran or not. Afterall, It's one of America's only European-ish cities. NYC has subsidized world-class transit, rent-stabilization, high taxes and free-childcare. Pretty European. Zohran is classic of case of 'the dose makes the poison'. Instead of subsidized buses, he wants free buses. Instead of rent-stabilization, he wants rent freezes. He wants to increase a…
>Abundance Economic historian Trevor Jackson engaged with Abundance (together with eco-radical book Overshoot) in the September issue of the American left-ish publication NYRB, if you're curious about an earnest essay [0]. Since it's behind a paywall and the Overshoot book also gets reviewed, I picked out the most substantive quotes to highlight the actual critique: > The evidentiary core of each chapter consists of…
Thanks for the link. I'll give it a read.
Re: Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
That document doesn't support your claim at all, that I see; it talks about limited deployment and management analytics. Could you point out if I'm missing something?
You can pick and choose what you see from the audit (though in no circumstances is it an astounding success). The general points i'm trying to get across is - Responder safety/back-up needs mean you can’t fully “swap out” police. This program still needed to bring in police most of the time. - Coverage and scale are hard in an actually big city, like NYC. (also why denver's success in a tiny city is sort of a useless…
> You can pick and choose what you see from the audit
I don't think so: Pick something that supports your claim. Right now it looks like you linked to it without even knowing what it said, hoping nobody would read it and you could claim some authority.
> Responder safety/back-up needs mean you can’t fully “swap out” police. This program still needed to bring in police most of the time.
The audit specifically says that they can't evaluate that; they don't know because they lack the appropriate data.
Is there something else you base that claim on?
> why not just equip police to better handle mental health cases
Because it takes a lot of training that police don't have time or possibly the propensity for. Even police have long complained that they are given jobs that they aren't suited for.
> the reason is idealogical stubbornness
You answered your own question with that ... there is nothing more I can add!
Re: Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whatever you're generally trying to say is not clear; looking at the other comments, I appear to not be the only one struggling with it. Why are you using the American revolution as an example? Like in what way is that remotely relevant? The revolution was the result of an actual denial of representation for all colonists, it wasn't about the general dynamics of a democracy in which the majority that wins an electon…
My original point was about people having any say in terms of how much tax they pay. And the American revolution was an example in the extreme of what can happen, given it did happen.
But it wasn't about how much tax they paid - it was about the idea of being taxed at all.
I live in Switzerland. Here the general population have about as much a say about tax as one can imagine, from federal to municipal (gemeinde) level. And guess what? You'll find people here who are very upset about the taxes they pay.
If people don't like a tax policy, they can vote against it. What they absolutely CANNOT do is try to instigate a revolution because the majority voted contra to their desires. That is not how democracy works.
Re: Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
My original point was about people having any say in terms of how much tax they pay. And the American revolution was an example in the extreme of what can happen, given it did happen.
But it wasn't about how much tax they paid - it was about the idea of being taxed at all . I live in Switzerland. Here the general population have about as much a say about tax as one can imagine, from federal to municipal (gemeinde) level. And guess what? You'll find people here who are very upset about the taxes they pay. If people don't like a tax policy, they can vote against it. What they absolutely CANNOT do is…
> But it wasn't about how much tax they paid - it was about the idea of being taxed at all.
I don't see a difference, fundamentally it comes down to consent of the governed. If 51% of a country votes for something, and it doesn't happen, then what's the point in voting?
Re: Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you not live in a parliamentary democracy with regular elections?
I live in France, which I'm not sure if you paying attention to it (no judgement, why would you), but as a country, they're somewhat financially screwed, so whether or not there are elections, or even if the people have representation, something needs to be done, and it will likely involve higher taxation and cost of living generally.
Ok fair, France has been a disaster lately. However, it's actually more that as a country, you'll need to figure out coalitions as it looks pretty evenly split three ways.
If it's any consolation, I probably pay similar tax rates to France, and get way worse services.
Re: Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Norwegians self identify as socialist for example Er.. that's not even remotely true
Last time I spent a month in Norway I repeatedly had various residents explain to me that various things were the way they were "because we are a socialist country". If they call themselves "socialist" then I will too.
Well, there is a difference between "this is a socialist country" and "I am a socialist".
Granted though, that under a functioning democracy, there will be overlap: if the country is x then most likely at least a plurality of voters support x. It doesn't mean that "all citizens support x" or "any specific citizen supports x and self identifies themself an x-ist".
Re: Europeans recognize Zohran Mamdani's policies as 'normal'
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last time I spent a month in Norway I repeatedly had various residents explain to me that various things were the way they were "because we are a socialist country". If they call themselves "socialist" then I will too.
Well, there is a difference between "this is a socialist country" and "I am a socialist". Granted though, that under a functioning democracy, there will be overlap: if the country is x then most likely at least a plurality of voters support x . It doesn't mean that "all citizens support x " or "any specific citizen supports x and self identifies themself an x-ist".
> Well, there is a difference between "this is a socialist country" and "I am a socialist".
To be clear, the former is what I was repeatedly told. Nobody personally self-identified themselves as a socialist to me, they described their country as socialist.