The exodus from New York City will only get worse under Mamdani
Zohran Mamdani recently won the Democratic primary, which is likely enough to secure the mayoralty of New York City. He still has to get through a general election that includes incumbent Eric Adams, now running as an independent. But Mamdani is in a strong position.
How did Mamdani rise to the top of the ticket over Andrew Cuomo, a well-known but scandal-plagued former governor? He ran a calculated campaign focused on New York City's affordability crisis. He's promised free bus rides, city-run grocery stores, a $30 minimum wage, and rent freezes — all to be funded by the, in Mamdani's eyes, evil billionaires of the city.
So have at it. If you're old enough to remember New York City before the 1990s, you've seen what can happen under dysfunctional leadership in one of the world's most important cities.
But if Mamdani is indeed successful in implementing his policy ideas, expect one noticeable trend to continue and likely grow: the number of people leaving New York for greener pastures. While we may criticize bad ideas or bad policy, that's the beauty of the American federalist system.
We often look to Washington for answers, but that's the wrong approach. State and local governments retain significant control over many aspects of our daily lives, including education, criminal justice, infrastructure, elections, and taxation. This decentralization creates a unique environment in which cities and states are free to innovate and compete.
One of the most powerful aspects of federalism is that it allows states to serve as 'laboratories of democracy,' a phrase popularized by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis. States can experiment with new laws, policies and regulations tailored to the specific needs and preferences of their populations. When those policies are effective, they may be adopted by other states, and occasionally even by the federal government. When they fail, the impact is limited to that one jurisdiction.
This system naturally fosters healthy competition among the states. Policymakers are incentivized to make their states more attractive for residents, workers, and businesses.
That often means pursuing lower taxes, fewer regulations, safer communities, and better educational options. Much of the South, including Georgia, has benefited by adopting policies aimed at growing their economies, cutting red tape and reducing taxes. In doing so, they've attracted new residents and companies fleeing high-tax, high-regulation states like California, Illinois and, yes, New York.
Partisans may put out rankings on who is the best or worst, but there is no more measurable sign of success (or failure) than people voting with their feet.
This competition is real. States vie for jobs, investment, and talent. They actively court small and major corporations, touting their state's tax climate, workforce, and quality of life. When a company relocates its U.S. headquarters, or a family moves for a lower cost of living, that's federalism in action.
Federalism also serves as a check on the national government. When Washington overreaches or fails to act, states can step in. During COVID-19, for example, states made widely varying decisions about lockdowns, mandates, and school closures. That diversity of approaches allowed for comparisons, corrections, and accountability — and, it turns out, it was one of the biggest drivers of out-migration from states like New York over the past five years.
Ultimately, federalism ensures that no single ideology or governing model dominates the entire country. It gives Americans the freedom to choose where they live based not just on geography or climate, but on values, opportunity, and public policy. This freedom of movement and choice reinforces liberty and drives continual improvement.
In the last five years of available Census information, 78,000 residents have moved from New York to Georgia. That wasn't because numerous families happened to break down on Interstate 95. It was intentional.
If Mamdani is successful at putting socialism into action in New York City, expect those numbers to continue growing.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
6 minutes ago
- New York Post
Judge Judy recreates controversial American verdicts and challenges viewers in ‘Justice on Trial'
EXCLUSIVE – Judge Judith Sheindlin helps recreate some of the most controversial court cases in American history in her new show, 'Justice on Trial.' The show, which was over 10 years in the making and finally premiered on Prime Video last Monday, revisits eight of the most monumental court cases in American memory — allowing the viewer to decide if justice was truly served with each verdict. The main lawyers featured on the show are Larry Bakman and Daniel Mentzer. Advertisement Episode seven features a re-telling of 'Snyder v. Phelps,' in which a grieving father, Albert Snyder, sued Fred Phelps and his followers at the Westboro Baptist Church for emotional distress after church members protested his son Matthew's military funeral. The churchgoers, as depicted in the episode, carried signs reading, 'God Hates Your Son,' 'Thank God for Dead Soldiers,' and 'Thank God for 9/11,' to protest the military's tolerance of homosexuality. 7 The show, which was over 10 years in the making and finally premiered on Prime Video last Monday. Michael Becker/Prime 7 The main lawyers featured on the show are Larry Bakman and Daniel Mentzer. Michael Becker/Prime As Snyder noted during the trial, his son was not gay. The protesters were protesting the military at-large. The court showdown highlighted the legal boundaries of protected speech when it conflicts with potential harm to others. Advertisement A jury in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland agreed with Snyder and awarded him a total of $10.9 million, which the judge lowered to $5 million. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the judgment, holding that Phelps' speech was protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court upheld the Fourth Circuit's ruling. The fiery Sheindlin had an opinion on the matter. While she and others may find the protesters' signs 'abhorrent,' she intoned that the Constitution does protect free speech. 7 A jury in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland agreed with Snyder and awarded him a total of $10.9 million. Courtesy of Prime 'Totally uncaring for people who are religious people, totally uncaring about the emotional trauma that that kind of demonstration might have on the family,' Sheindlin said of the Westboro protests in an interview with Fox News Digital. 'And yet the Supreme Court said in its decision that they had a right to express their views, even though their views were maybe abhorrent to the vast majority of Americans. I suppose you have to be able to… I wouldn't want to tolerate seeing the American flag burned in protest in America. Just wouldn't. It would offend me. But you have the right to do it. Is there a law that proscribes it? And I'd say probably not.' Advertisement So how do Americans reconcile their anger at a verdict with the Court's constitutional responsibilities? Sheindlin began her answer by referencing the movie 'American President.' 'I mean, we all would like our presidents to be like Michael Douglas, correct?' she said. 'And he said something at the end, but he's making the big speech at the end. He said, 'As an American, America is not easy, and you have to be able to defend somebody burning a flag, the American flag, as a protest, if you're going to insist that freedom of speech and expression exists.' And while we are all offended, it just didn't seem right that for no apparent reason, with no knowledge of who this young man was who was killed, just because they had a cause, they didn't care what the collateral damage was emotionally to the family of this young man.' 7 Judge Judy Sheindlin presiding over a courtroom trial. Courtesy of Prime 7 Judge Judy said there was one case, in particular, that spurred her to want to create 'Justice on Trial' and that may also leave some Americans feeling like justice may have taken a walk. Courtesy of Prime Advertisement Judge Judy said there was one case, in particular, that spurred her to want to create 'Justice on Trial' and that may also leave some Americans feeling like justice may have taken a walk. 'It was a case that happened in New York many, many years ago,' she shared. 'Two young thugs decided to rob an old man on the subway. Believe it or not, I remember the man's name. His name was Jerome Sandusky, and he was a man well in his 70s. And one of them was acting as a lookout. The other one went down the stairs with the pretty deserted platform and was beating up this old man in an attempt to take his watch and cash. And a transit police officer heard the screams of the old man coming from the subway, and he ran down into the subway. Pulled out his revolver and said, 'Stop, police!' And the young thug ran off and was running up the stairs. Police said, 'Stop, police!' He didn't stop, and the police officer shot him. And he shot him in the back as he was fleeing.' Then things got tricky in court and the situation seemed to turn on the victim. 7 Then things got tricky in court and the situation seemed to turn on the victim. Courtesy of Prime 7 'The young man pled guilty to the robbery, was sentenced, but hired a lawyer who sued the transit authority in the city of New York and received a judgment, a jury verdict for $4.3 million,' Sheindlin continued. Michael Becker/Prime 'The young man pled guilty to the robbery, was sentenced, but hired a lawyer who sued the transit authority in the city of New York and received a judgment, a jury verdict for $4.3 million,' Sheindlin continued. 'And then Mr. Sandusky, who took a very long time to recover from his physical wounds, but who would, you know — if you're a crime victim emotionally, you really never get over being a victim of violent crime. And Mr. Sandusky, he said, 'Well, that's sort of outrageous. I was the victim.' And so he hired a lawyer because now this thug had $4.3 million and his lawsuit was barred by the statute of limitations. So there are many facets to that case. Whether or not, ultimately, justice was served is an issue. And if you ask 10 people, given those set of facts, you will get at least eight different opinions.' Advertisement All eight episodes of 'Justice on Trial' are streaming now on Prime Video. Other cases covered by the series include the famous Scopes Monkey trial, Gideon v. Wainwright and People v. Turriago. In the latter case, troopers stopped Leonardo Turriago for a speeding violation on the New York State Thruway, which led police to discover a decomposing body locked in a steamer trunk. The episode explores the question of whether or not the search of the truck was legal. The series is created and executive produced by Sheindlin. Casey Barber, David Carr and Randy Douthit are also executive producers. Amy Freisleben is a co-executive producer.
7 minutes ago
Democrat Roy Cooper launches Senate bid in North Carolina for Tillis' seat
Roy Cooper, the former Democratic governor of North Carolina, officially launched his Senate bid for Republican Sen. Thom Tillis' open seat in 2026 on Monday. 'I'm Roy Cooper, and I know that today, for too many Americans, the middle class feels like a distant dream. Meanwhile, the biggest corporations and the richest Americans have grabbed unimaginable wealth at your expense. It's time for that to change,' Cooper said in an announcement video posted on X. In his announcement, Cooper said he believes that the next election will determine 'if we even have a middle class in America anymore.' He doesn't mention President Donald Trump directly. 'Right now, our country is facing a moment as fragile as any I can remember, and the decisions we make in the next election will determine if we even have a middle class in America anymore. I never really wanted to go to Washington. I just wanted to serve the people of North Carolina, right here where I've lived all my life. But these are not ordinary times. Politicians in D.C. are running up our debt, ripping away our health care, disrespecting our veterans, cutting health for the poor, and even putting Medicare and Social Security at risk just to give tax breaks to billionaires. That's wrong, and I've had enough.' The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) responded to the news in a statement slamming Cooper as both "far left" and anti-Trump, alongside attempting to tie him to former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris. 'Roy Cooper is a Democrat lapdog who spent his time as Governor sabotaging President Trump, doing Joe Biden and Kamala Harris' bidding,' NRSC Communications Director Joanna Rodriguez said partly in a statement. 'When Hurricane Helene hit, Cooper's gross mismanagement left over 100 North Carolinians dead and an estimated $53 billion in damage to businesses, homes, and infrastructure. North Carolina wants a senator who will champion working families, safety, and American values, not an incompetent, far-left career politician like Cooper who will wreck everything they care about.' As for the Republicans' pick, multiple sources tell ABC News that RNC Chair Michael Whatley is planning to launch a bid after being asked directly by Trump to run. Trump is hopeful that Whatley, who led the North Carolina Republican Party before becoming RNC chair, has the knowledge of the state, the national profile and the network of relationships to run a strong campaign. Tillis said in June that he would not seek reelection, citing 'the political theatre and partisan gridlock in Washington' and as Trump railed against him for opposing his signature megabill.
Newsweek
7 minutes ago
- Newsweek
China Fires Back at US Allies: 'Political Manipulation'-
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. China's embassy in the United Kingdom has issued a sharp rebuke after Britain and Australia raised concerns over Beijing's actions in the Asia-Pacific, slamming the two countries for "unwarranted accusations and political manipulation." Why It Matters The statement followed the arrival of the U.K.'s flagship aircraft carrier, HMS Prince of Wales, in the port of Darwin just three days earlier to take part in Australia's Exercise Talisman Sabre 2025. The U.S. and its allies—both within the Asia-Pacific and beyond—have been stepping up security cooperation in response to China's increasingly assertive actions in the region, as President Xi Jinping seeks to challenge American primacy. Newsweek reached out to the Australian Department of Defence and the U.K.'s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office via emailed requests for comment. What To Know The Chinese embassy on Sunday pushed back against a joint statement issued by the U.K. and Australian foreign and defense ministers following their ministerial consultations in Sydney on Saturday. "We firmly oppose the groundless accusations against China in the U.K.-Australia joint statement. Taiwan, Xinjiang, Xizang [Tibet], and Hong Kong affairs are all China's internal affairs, in which no foreign country has the right to interfere," an embassy spokesperson said, responding to criticism of Beijing's domestic actions. British aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales is escorted by tugboats as it leaves from Portsmouth Naval Base on the south coast of England, on April 22 for deployment to the Indo-Pacific region. British aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales is escorted by tugboats as it leaves from Portsmouth Naval Base on the south coast of England, on April 22 for deployment to the Indo-Pacific region. Ben Stansall/AFP via Getty Images The joint statement cited China's "destabilizing" military activities around Taiwan—the self-ruled island Beijing claims as its territory and has vowed to unite with, through force if necessary. Also mentioned were alleged human rights abuses in Tibet and Xinjiang, and suppression of free speech and democracy in Hong Kong. The spokesperson also objected to the statement's depiction of China's behavior in the South China Sea, saying, "The U.K. and Australia should stop hyping up the issue and stirring up trouble." China claims most of the busy waterway as its territory—claims that overlap with those of several neighbors and have led to a bitter territorial dispute with U.S. treaty ally the Philippines. The spokesperson also rejected the joint statement's call for China to prevent its companies from supplying dual-use civilian-military goods to Russia for use in the ongoing war in Ukraine. "China has been working actively to promote a ceasefire and peace talks, and has kept dual-use items under strict control," the official said. While China has presented itself as neutral in the conflict, it has never called Russia's actions an invasion, and booming trade with Moscow has helped sustain Russia's wartime economy—prompting NATO to label China a "decisive enabler." What People Have Said John Haley, British defense secretary, told the Telegraph regarding a potential war over Taiwan: "If we have to fight, as we have done in the past, Australia and the U.K. are nations that will fight together. We exercise together, and by exercising together and being more ready to fight, we deter better together." Haley added, however, that he was speaking in "general terms" and that London preferred to see disputes solved "peacefully." What's Next Exercise Talisman Sabre will conclude on August 4. This year's iteration—the 11th and largest yet—involves 30,000 military personnel from 19 countries, including the United States.
