
Will Zohran Mamdani help or hurt New York's economy?
The 33-year-old Democratic socialist proposed plans that would transform the city – including a free bus programme and freezing rent increases on rent-stabilised apartments – paid for by a heightened income tax for millionaires and an increase in the corporate tax rate.
Those promises catapulted him to ultimately win the mayoral primary 12 points ahead of his next closest competitor, Andrew Cuomo, who had been endorsed by the likes of former President Bill Clinton.
McKayla Lankau, a 25-year-old tech worker, had canvassed for Mamdani's campaign. She lives in Bushwick, a Brooklyn neighbourhood which Mamdani won by a 79-point margin, and said housing was among the many economic policies that emboldened her to vote for Mamdani.
'I believe that if people are living a better life in a more affordable community, we all will, and Zohran's campaign fulfilled that from my perspective,' said Lankau.
As the cost of living rises and US President Donald Trump continues a rightward march as he shapes political discourse, many voters feel Democratic leaders have offered little more than symbolic gestures and strongly worded statements.
Mamdani, a three-term state assembly member, presented something different– a campaign centred around grassroots organising over big donors, detailed policies over vague slogans, and the kind of charisma and gravitas that defined other change candidates like Barack Obama's successful presidential bid in 2008 or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's surprise win of the House of Representatives in 2018.
Affordability was central to Mamdani's message – and it resonated. But Mamdani also faces another side of New York – the ultra-wealthy investor class. They are the ones who have made New York City known as the epicentre of global finance and commerce. They are a powerful force to be reckoned with, and they are not happy.
'They are mad that they lost, and they're used to getting their way. They're used to setting the rules…. Mamdani ran a transparent, clear campaign and New Yorkers showed up in droves to support it,' political strategist Adin Lenchner of Carroll Street Campaigns told Al Jazeera.
Some investors and lenders are threatening to pull out of deals amid fears of new taxes and regulations. Michael Comparato, a managing director at Benefit Street Partners, said he walked away from a $300m hotel investment in New York. 'The financial capital of the world could be in the hands of a socialist. Hard to fathom,' he posted on LinkedIn. Comparato did not respond to requests for comment.
While Democratic socialism – an ideology that believes in shifting power from corporations to workers within the framework of a capitalist democracy – is different from socialism, that sentiment echoed across the city's financial power players.
Hedge fund manager Bill Ackman said he was 'gravely concerned' about Mamdani's rise, warning that the city would become 'economically unviable'. He pledged to support a more 'centrist' candidate. Pershing Square, his firm, declined to comment.
'The fear isn't about economics, I think it's about power,' Lenchner said. 'That doesn't mean the policy is unsound. I think affordability is economic growth.'
Mamdani's funding proposals are ambitious but not unprecedented. He would raise the city's corporate tax rate to 11.5 percent – matching New Jersey next door – up from the current corporate tax rate of up to 7.25 percent. Fortune 500 firms like Johnson & Johnson and Prudential Financial base their headquarters in New Jersey despite its higher rate. Mamdani's campaign estimates this would generate $5bn annually.
Historically, higher rates haven't driven business away. In the late 1990s, private sector employment grew at an annualised pace of 2.6 percent, while wages and private sector salaries increased by 9.6 percent.
'I think there's a lot of exaggeration here on the part of the wealthy investor class on how much this is going to economically harm New York,' Daniel Wortel-London, professor of history at Bard College and author of The Menace of Prosperity: New York City and the Struggle for Economic Development, told Al Jazeera.
Mamdani also proposes a new tax of an additional 2 percent on individuals earning more than $1m. That is projected to raise another $4bn annually. Today, earners who make $1m already pay a combined federal, state and local tax burden of about 46 percent (37 percent of that is the federal income tax set by the federal government).
Currently, the marginal local rate for someone making $40,000 (3.82 percent) is nearly identical to a millionaire's (3.88 percent), due to New York City's flat local tax structure for anyone making more than $50,000 annually.
Still, Mamdani can't unilaterally change tax policy. Any adjustments would require approval from Governor Kathy Hochul. Wortel-London says that shared priorities between Mamdani and Hochul – such as expanding childcare – could create opportunities for collaboration, including on free bus service proposals that would also need state buy-in.
The state already raised personal income taxes on millionaires in 2021 under then-Governor Cuomo, pushing rates to 46 percent (when state, local and federal income taxes are combined), the highest in the country.
Anthony Scaramucci, founder of SkyBridge Capital and a former Trump White House communications director, warned in a podcast with journalist Katty Kay that Mamdani's platform could accelerate the migration of wealthy residents to states like Florida. Scaramucci did not reply to a request for comment.
To an extent that is true, according to the Citizen Budget Commission, a New York-based nonpartisan think tank. Because of the millionaire migration, the city missed out on $2bn of tax revenue that ended up going elsewhere.
As per the data, the net negative migration for the highest income earners was highest in 2020 and 2021 – when the COVID-19 pandemic was at its peak and could have been a major contributing factor behind the move, as was the case all over the country with people moving out of cities – and began trending back towards historical rates in 2022.
With the exception of that period, high-income earners did not leave at a significantly higher rate before or after.
However, just because millionaires are moving out doesn't mean that new ones aren't moving in. According to a Henley & Partners report, New York has gained more new millionaires than any other city in the world – up 45 percent from 2014 to 2024.
'Most high earners really don't relocate just to avoid taxes. They certainly don't really relocate across the country. Most high-earners are staying in the city for prestige or their family or a culture. I think there have been scares before. We've seen it when [former Mayor] Bill de Blasio got in. They were also worried about tax hikes, and they didn't leave in droves,' Wortel-London said.
Rather than courting the ultra-wealthy, Mamdani's economic pitch is aimed at small businesses, which employ the majority of New Yorkers. He plans to appoint a 'Mom-and-Pop Tsar' to cut red tape, streamline permits, reduce fees and fines (including not charging first-time offenders), and increase funding for small business support agencies by 500 percent. His platform promises to cut business fees in half.
How realistic are the plans?
Nowhere is Mamdani's message more resonant than in housing. As rents skyrocket, nearly half of New Yorkers say they've considered leaving the city, according to the think tank, the 5boro Institute.
His campaign promised to freeze rent increases on rent-stabilised units, which account for about 28 percent of New York's housing stock, which is important to voters like Lankau, who currently lives in one. These are typically buildings built before 1974 with six or more units. While some newer buildings opt in, they do so in exchange for tax breaks.
Under the current law, rent increases are approved annually by the city's Rent Guidelines Board, an independent panel appointed by the mayor. Mayor Eric Adams, the incumbent, approved a combined 9 percent hike in his first three years in office, followed by another 4.5 percent earlier this month. If elected, Mamdani would appoint new members to this board and seek to reverse course.
But the proposal has drawn criticism. The New York Apartment Association (NYAA) – a pro-landlord group that backed Cuomo – says a freeze could worsen the city's housing shortage. Landlords, they argue, may choose to leave apartments vacant rather than perform costly repairs that can't be recouped through rent increases due to a 2019 law. As a result, tens of thousands of rent-stabilised units are currently vacant.
'Freezing rents will just accelerate the distress and physical decline of these buildings,' NYAA CEO Kenny Burgos told Al Jazeera.
Mamdani's platform doesn't currently include a proposal to address these vacancies or to cap rent increases on market-rate apartments directly.
But to elevate pressure on the housing market, which does indirectly impact the cost of market-rate apartments, the campaign has proposed building 200,000 new affordable units over 10 years – tripling the city's current pace. His housing plan also includes overhauling zoning laws, eliminating parking minimums, and supporting mixed-use development.
'I think those two, hand in hand, [freezes on rent-stabilised units and plans to build more housing] would be the kind of holistic programme that would make New York more affordable,' Lenchner said.
It remains unclear whether Mamdani would adopt policies proposed by Brad Lander, the third-place primary finisher who endorsed him. Lander had proposed converting some city-owned golf courses into housing. Lander did not respond to a request for comment.
Mamdani also wants to raise the city's minimum wage to $30 per hour by 2030 – up from $16.50. A Cornell University study estimates a true living wage in New York would be $28.54, meaning Mamdani's proposal would exceed that. It would also tie future increases to inflation and productivity metrics.
Even so, the gap between 'living' and 'comfortable' is wide. A SmartAsset study found that a New Yorker would need to earn $66 per hour to live comfortably. Mamdani hopes to relieve some of that pressure through policies like universal childcare, free bus service and a public grocery store option.
The city-run grocery store plan would start with one location in each borough to address food deserts. Much similar to city-owned hospitals or public housing, it would not replace the private sector but augment it. Regardless, this proposal has sparked backlash from John Catsimatidis, the Republican megadonor and owner of Gristedes, a local grocery store chain. He threatened to close his stores if Mamdani wins.
Catsimatidis, who donated over $500,000 to Republicans this year, according to Federal Election Commission records, did not respond to a request for comment.
Grocery costs remain politically sensitive. The latest Consumer Price Index shows grocery prices are up 2.4 percent over last year.
Mamdani also wants to make city buses permanently free. He championed a successful pilot programme in the State Assembly, which boosted weekday ridership by 30 percent and weekend ridership by 38 percent. Making that permanent would require cooperation from state leaders and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), which is state-run, and might require some concessions on his part.
'The kind of momentum and energy behind this campaign makes a powerful case in arguing before Albany to make those kinds of investments, giving him that kind of public mandate to pressure state lawmakers to move this kind of proposal forward,' Lenchner said.
This, however, comes as the MTA is under additional pressure from the federal government. The US Department of Transportation recently threatened to withhold funding over New York's congestion pricing plan, a toll on cars entering parts of Manhattan during peak hours, designed to fund transit improvements.
The political calculus
Like any mayor, Mamdani wouldn't govern in a vacuum. He'd have to navigate complex City Council dynamics, work with borough presidents and contend with powerful interest groups.
Democrats have struggled across the country because they have such a broad coalition, suggesting little conviction on policy positions which has turned off their base. Even if Mamdani's proposals are seen as more 'radical', he enters negotiations with a clear starting point and non-negotiables – something Republicans mastered a decade ago when they embraced it and Democrats still have not figured out, Lenchner suggested.
'It's hard to think in recent memory of a campaign that spoke with such clarity about its objectives, about its convictions, about its moral clarity, and about its practical policy objectives,' Lenchner added.
To win in November, he'll need to expand his coalition, particularly among Jewish and Black voters where he underperformed.
In a city still defined by finance, Mamdani will also have to show he can hold Wall Street accountable without alienating it. His campaign appears to be trying. The Partnership for New York City – a business group representing more than 300 top firms – hosted a meeting between Mamdani and executives, at the campaign's request, which according to reporting from the outlet The City, went well and attendees left feeling that he was 'willing to listen' and 'find solutions to the city's challenges that will work for all' but they were sceptical if he was genuine.
Mamdani's campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Al Jazeera
19 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
US Justice Department to discuss Epstein with Ghislaine Maxwell
Officials from the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) are set to interview sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell in Florida, as pressure continues to mount on the administration of US President Donald Trump over the handling of the files of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein. Former British socialite Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence after being convicted in 2021 of sex trafficking minors on behalf of Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial in his own paedophile trafficking case. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche – Trump's former personal lawyer for his hush money trial and two federal criminal cases – was to interview Maxwell on Thursday at a federal courthouse in Tallahassee, Florida, multiple US media outlets reported. In a social media post on Tuesday, Blanche said that Trump 'has told us to release all credible evidence' and that if Maxwell has information about anyone who has committed crimes against victims, the FBI and the DOJ 'will hear what she has to say.' A DOJ spokesman did not immediately return a message from The Associated Press seeking comment on Thursday. The person who confirmed the meeting to The Associated Press insisted on anonymity to describe a closed-door encounter. Maxwell, the daughter of the late British press baron Robert Maxwell, is the only former Epstein associate who was convicted in connection with his activities, which conspiracy theorists allege included trafficking young models for VIPs. Joyce Vance, an ex-federal prosecutor who now teaches law at the University of Alabama, said any ''new' testimony [Maxwell] offers is inherently unreliable unless backed by evidence.' 'Trump could give Ghislaine Maxwell a pardon on his last day in office, in exchange for favourable testimony now,' Vance said in a post on X. 'She knows he's her only chance for release.' 'Client list' The meeting with Maxwell marks another attempt by the Trump administration to defuse anger among the Republican president's own supporters over what they have long seen as a cover-up of sex crimes by Epstein, a wealthy financier with high-level connections. On July 7, the DOJ and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) issued a memo saying that a review of Epstein's case yielded no new evidence, including no 'client list'. But that finding caused an uproar among Trump's Make America Great Again (MAGA) base, which noted that US Attorney General Pam Bondi herself had referred to a client list 'sitting on my desk right now' earlier this year. Members of Trump's base have long embraced conspiracy theories about rings of sex offenders in the highest levels of government, and some have questioned the circumstances surrounding Epstein's death, speculating that it was an orchestrated cover-up. On Wednesday, the House Oversight Committee subpoenaed Maxwell to appear before Congress next month, noting in a statement that 'the facts and circumstances surrounding both your and Mr Epstein's cases have received immense public interest and scrutiny'. The committee's Republican chair, US Representative James Comer, noted in his statement that while the DOJ was moving forward with its interview, 'It is imperative that Congress conduct oversight of the federal government's enforcement of sex trafficking laws generally and specifically its handling of the investigation and prosecution of you and Mr Epstein.' Democrats have also pushed for the release of the Epstein files, and on Wednesday, a Republican-led panel pushed forward a Democrat-led subcommittee subpoena demanding that the DOJ release the Epstein files. In an interview with political commentator Brian Tyler Cohen, US Representative Jasmine Crockett, a Democrat, said she would trust Congress to interview Maxwell more than the DOJ, noting the potential for 'them sanitising the information that we get, or potentially engaging in some type of threats, or potentially offering a pardon if certain things were said or not said'.


Al Jazeera
20 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
American Airlines restores economic forecast amid economic uncertainty
American Airlines has restored its full-year outlook as broader economic uncertainty continues to weigh on domestic consumer demand across the travel industry. The Fort Worth, Texas-based carrier on Thursday offered a wide range for its full-year forecast on the heels of its earnings report, saying the broader economic uncertainty is hobbling consumer spending. The airline had suspended financial guidance in April. The airline says it expects an adjusted loss per share of 20 cents a share to a profit of 80 cents a share in 2025. The midpoint of the forecast is 30 cents per share, compared with analysts' average estimate of 61 cents a share, according to LSEG data. American, which generates more than two-thirds of its passenger revenue from the US domestic market, said that if domestic travel demand continues to strengthen, it expects to hit the top end of its outlook. But if the economy weakens, it only expects to be at the bottom end of the forecast. 'The domestic network has been under stress because of the uncertainty in the economy and the reluctance of domestic passengers to get in the game,' CEO Robert Isom told analysts on an earnings call. American said tepid domestic travel demand affected its bookings in July. Isom, however, said the performance is expected to improve sequentially in August and September. 'We expect that July will be the low point,' he said. The company expects its domestic unit revenue, or revenue generated from each seat, to remain lower year-over-year in the third quarter. Its non-fuel operating costs are estimated to be up as much as 4.5 percent in the September quarter. American expects an adjusted loss per share in the range of 10 cents to 60 cents in the third quarter, compared with analysts' estimates of a loss of 7 cents, according to data compiled by LSEG. The company's outlook contrasts with upbeat forecasts of rival Delta and United Airlines. Alaska Air Group has also reported improvements in passenger traffic and pricing power. Most US airlines withdrew their financial forecasts in April as President Donald Trump's trade war created the biggest uncertainty for the industry since the COVID-19 pandemic. While some have reinstated their expectations, there is lingering uncertainty as to how the economy will fare in an ever-evolving tariff landscape. Demand in the domestic travel market has remained subdued, with budget travellers approaching their plans with caution, hurting carriers that primarily service the US domestic market and price-sensitive customers. Even summer, typically the peak money-making season for airlines, is falling short this year, with unsold standard economy seats forcing carriers to cut fares. It dented the second-quarter earnings of Southwest Airlines, the largest US domestic airline. At American, the domestic market was the weakest in the second quarter, with its unit revenue declining 6.4 percent from a year ago. The company's unit revenue in international markets was up, led by a 5 percent annual jump in the transatlantic market. On Wall Street, the stock is taking a hit and was down 7.2 percent from the market open as of 11:30am in New York (15:30 GMT).


Al Jazeera
21 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
What's in the $200m deal Trump has struck with Columbia University?
New York City-based Columbia University has agreed to pay $221m to settle claims by US President Donald Trump's administration that it failed to curb anti-Semitism on campus, in exchange for the reinstatement of billions of dollars in federal funding. The deal, agreed on Wednesday, comes after sweeping university campus protests against Israel's war in Gaza during the spring and summer of 2024 and this year were criticised as veering into anti-Semitism. In February, the government cut $400m in federal research funding for Columbia in a bid to force its administrators to respond to alleged harassment of Jewish students and faculty. The unprecedented agreement marks a victory in Trump's efforts to exert greater control over higher education, including campus activism, and could offer a framework for future deals with other universities. What's in the deal Trump has struck with Columbia? Columbia has agreed to pay $200m to the government over three years, as well as making a separate $21m payment to settle claims by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In exchange, the 'vast majority' of the frozen $400m in federal funding will be reinstated, the university said. Columbia will also regain access to billions of dollars' worth of current and future grants under the deal. Columbia is required, within 30 days, to appoint an administrator who will report to the university president and will be responsible for overseeing the deal's compliance. This includes verifying that the institution ends programmes that promote 'unlawful efforts to achieve race-based outcomes, quotas [and] diversity targets'. Additionally, Columbia must review its Middle East curriculum to make sure it is 'comprehensive and balanced' and appoint new faculty staff to its Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies. Columbia said the agreement establishes Bart Schwartz, of the compliance firm Guidepost Solutions, as an independent monitor who will report to the government on its progress every six months. The university will be expected to compile a report for the monitor to ensure its programmes 'do not promote unlawful DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion] goals'. Why have they come to this agreement? Columbia said the agreement formalises already-announced reforms to address harassment of Jewish students and staff, including the hiring of additional public safety personnel, changes to disciplinary processes, and efforts to foster 'an inclusive and respectful learning environment'. The dispute between Columbia and the Trump administration began after Jewish students and faculty complained of harassment on campus by pro-Palestine demonstrators, while pro-Palestinian advocates accused critics of often wrongly conflating opposition to Israel with the hatred of Jews. Columbia's acting president, Claire Shipman, said the agreement marked 'an important step forward after a period of sustained federal scrutiny and institutional uncertainty'. 'The settlement was carefully crafted to protect the values that define us and allow our essential research partnership with the federal government to get back on track. Importantly, it safeguards our independence, a critical condition for academic excellence and scholarly exploration, work that is vital to the public interest,' she added. Trump hailed the settlement as 'historic' in a post on his Truth Social platform. 'Numerous other Higher Education Institutions that have hurt so many, and been so unfair and unjust, and have wrongly spent federal money, much of it from our government, are upcoming,' he wrote. How have students and activists reacted? Student activist group Columbia University Apartheid Divest (CUAD) slammed the settlement as 'a bribe'. 'Imagine selling your students out just so you can pay Trump $221 million dollars and keep funding genocide,' the group wrote on X. It added that Columbia's disciplinary action against students, including suspensions and expulsions, this week was a punishment that 'hugely' exceeded the precedent for non-Palestine-related demonstrations. Non-governmental organisation Palestine Legal accused Columbia of 'weaponising claims of antisemitism to punish those calling for freedom for Palestinians'. 'It is clear that Columbia's desire to create a community 'where all feel welcome' doesn't extend to students who call for an end to Israel's genocide,' the group posted on X. Hasan Piker, a left-wing activist, political commentator and a critic of Trump, said the US president was 'underwater on everything and Columbia is still caving to Trump on everything', adding 'it seems like some of these institutions were looking for the pretext to go right'. What steps has Columbia already taken to pacify the Trump administration? In March, Columbia agreed to a list of demands laid down by Trump in return for negotiations to reinstate its $400m federal funding, which he had revoked a month before, citing 'a failure to protect Jewish students from antisemitic harassment'. Among other concessions, the university agreed to ban face mask coverings during protests, as well as to install 36 campus police officers with special powers to arrest students. Earlier this month, Columbia adopted a controversial definition of anti-Semitism drafted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which has been criticised for what some say is conflating criticism of the state of Israel and Zionism with anti-Semitism. Critics have warned that the definition could be used to stifle dissent and curb academic freedom. In a letter sent to the United Nations in 2023, 60 human and civil rights organisations said the definition should not be used. 'The IHRA definition has often been used to wrongly label criticism of Israel as antisemitic, and thus chill and sometimes suppress, non-violent protest, activism and speech critical of Israel and/or Zionism, including in the US and Europe,' they wrote. On Tuesday, Columbia also announced it would suspend, expel or revoke degrees for nearly 80 students who participated in a Butler Library demonstration on its campus on May 7, 2025 and a 'Revolt for Rafah' encampment on May 31, 2024 during the university's annual alumni weekend. During protests, students demanded that the university's $14.8bn endowment stop investing in weapons makers and other companies that support Israel. Protest organiser and former student Mahmoud Khalil, 29, was the first person to be detained during the Trump administration's push to deport pro-Palestinian activists who are not US citizens. The school also said it would no longer engage with pro-Palestinian group CUAD. Which other universities has Trump set his sights on, and why? The Trump administration is focusing attention on 10 universities that it deems noteworthy in its campaign to root out anti-Semitism. These are Columbia; George Washington University; Harvard; Johns Hopkins University; New York University; Northwestern; the University of California, Berkeley; the University of California, Los Angeles; the University of Minnesota; and the University of Southern California. Columbia University was the first college to see its funding slashed, but several Ivy League schools have been subjected to or threatened with funding cuts since Trump took office in January 2024. More than $2bn in total was frozen for Cornell, Northwestern, Brown and Princeton universities. In April, the administration also threatened to freeze $510m in grants to Brown University over alleged violations 'relating to antisemitic harassment and discrimination'. Harvard University was the first – and has so far been the only – major higher education institution to defy Trump's demands and fight back in federal court. This week, it argued in federal court that the Trump administration had illegally cut $2.6bn in funding in what were politically motivated attempts to reshape the institution. Are deals with other universities expected as well? Some universities are also believed to be in talks with the Trump administration, so more deals could be forthcoming. In particular, US news outlets have reported that officials from the Trump administration and Harvard are continuing negotiations, despite the court case brought by Harvard. In June, Trump posted on social media that 'if a Settlement is made on the basis that is currently being discussed, it will be 'mindbogglingly' HISTORIC, and very good for our Country'.