A few of our stories and columns are now in front of the paywall. We at The Chief remain committed to independent reporting on labor and civil service. It's been our mission since 1897. You can have a hand in ensuring that our reporting remains relevant in the decades to come. Consider supporting The Chief, which you can do for as little as $3.20 a month.
Billionaires are the result of a choice. A choice to prioritize our laws, economy and infrastructure around the protection of unprecedented wealth, instead of around working people. It is why we are told there isn’t enough money in the richest country in the world to pay for the things we need most. We made this choice, which means we can make a different one. Our public finances, our social fabric and, with it, our democracy depend on it.
It is why we are calling on our leaders in Albany to raise taxes on the wealthiest New Yorkers.
Without it, we can’t afford the promises already made (Moody’s has now revised New York City’s credit rating to “negative” from “stable” as a result of our budget deficit and the state faces a $27.5 deficit over the next four years), much less the promises that must be made: investments to address our housing crisis, fund health care and food assistance that President Trump has gutted, sustainable funding for universal childcare and more.
This is not a tomorrow problem; it is a today problem. New Yorkers can no longer afford to live in New York. Since 2000, New York City has already lost more than 200,000 Black residents. And the notion that we would lose the ultra-rich by raising taxes? It is simply not supported by the data. There are now 100,000 millionaires and 139 billionaires in New York State alone – an increase over the last two years. New York now has the highest level of inequality in the nation.
It is no surprise then that there is an urgent call from a majority of New Yorkers to raise taxes on the wealthy. Despite this, some leaders refuse to do so (a choice). Even our state comptroller – our chief financial officer – refuses to express an opinion on the issue. His silence is another choice.
These choices aren’t just walking us off a fiscal cliff; they are tearing apart our social fabric and our democracy. Asking the wealthiest New Yorkers to pay more does not just restore balance to budgets; it restores balance among all of us. It begins to restore what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. called “somebodiness.” That sense of self that is slipping away as the wealth gap explodes --- a chasm that grows relentlessly by the day as the waves of artificial intelligence and automation wash over our lives. As it widens, people lose more than financial stability. They lose dignity. They lose hope. They begin to feel that the system is not built for them and they are right. When this happens, democracy dies.
This level of inequality represents a catastrophic failure of 21st-century capitalism and political leadership. Dr. King put it this way: “When machines and computers, profit motives, and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.” He could just as easily have been describing 2026 as 1967. It is why Dr. King called for a “socially conscious democracy which reconciles the truths of individualism and collectivism.”
Both truths are needed right now --- not just the kind that asks, “what’s in it for me?” but, “what’s in it for us?” Consider how much in New York is owned by so few and how little is left for so many. A reminder that capitalism has been a deeply flawed form of organizing markets and resources --- and should not be the form of organizing our country. That’s what democracy is for.
And that is why we are all running to make a change in Albany. The contradictions we see all across New York --- gleaming prosperity beside persistent need --- should not be the natural order of things. They are not inevitable. They are the result of choices. Political choices made by leaders in Albany who refuse to think differently, refuse to act differently, and refuse to lead differently.
So let us choose differently --- in our state budget and on June 23.
New York has always lived with tension: wealth and want, ambition and struggle, promise and pressure. What has made us great is our willingness to confront that tension. We built this state by investing in the common good and asking those who have prospered the most to help sustain it. This is not “radical.” It is our history. It is how we turn tension into strength, and ensure that New York works for everyone. It is time we do so again.
1 comment on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
fcannisi
While I agree with everything written above, I would add that the problem didn't start in the 21st Century, but in the latter part of the 20th Century and it is bigger than NY.
When voters decided to embrace "Reaganomics" in 1980, they chose me-fare over welfare - Cut my taxes by a few bucks and I don't care if the wealthy get million-dollar tax cuts. That choice led to the largest redistribution of wealth, from the middle to the top, in human history. Those who made this choice still deny that it led to today's obscene wealth inequality.
That was the real "trickle down" or more accurately put trickle up economics. Federal responsibilities were sent back to the states under the banner of the "new federalism". As federal taxes dropped on businesses and wealth, states began lowering their taxes in a race to the bottom.
Wealth inequality is mathematically measurable using the GINI coefficient, where 0 represents complete equality and 1 total inequality. In 2023, the U.S. GINI was .418. For reference, most western European democracies are at a .33 GINI.
Another fact is that intelligence agencies use GINI coefficients to predict social revolts, the higher the GINI, the higher the probability of social revolt. As billionaire Nick Hanauer warned in a 2014 TED talk - the pitchforks are coming if the wealthy don't start sharing their riches.
Thursday, March 19 Report this