Zohran's race-based tax plan: Letters to the Editor — July 2, 2025
Zohran Mamdani's statement that he would raise taxes in 'richer, whiter neighborhoods' is an outlandishly racist proposition ('Zohran's 'cauc' talk,' June 28).
He has a deceitful smile that epitomizes his persona of being a sheep in wolf's clothing.
His left-wing agenda would place him in the stratosphere of radically extreme mayors nationwide.
He would make mayors like Brandon Johnson of Chicago and Karen Bass of Los Angeles look like Ronald Reagan disciples.
New York City is currently in fiscal limbo.
If elected mayor, Mamdani's left-wing policies would destroy it. Consequently, the Big Apple would become rotten to its core.
Denis David
East Rockaway
The people of New York City have lost their collective minds by voting for a socialist, racist, extremist and antisemite who, if elected, will destroy this once-great city.
Mamdani represents all that is wrong with the liberal way of thinking.
He will increase taxes on the rich, and now says that he will increase property taxes on 'white neighborhoods.'
Besides being racist, it is no doubt against the law and the civil rights of those homeowners in these so-called 'white neighborhoods.'
If elected, Mamdani will bring about an exodus from New York City like never before and will destroy what was once the financial capital of the United States.
Alan Brooks
Brooklyn
There are no words to explain the shock of who Democrats are selecting as candidates.
How could they ignore the struggles of cities like Los Angeles and Chicago that have far-left mayors?
There is a thing called 'economic racism,' so how could someone blatantly express racist views and run for office?
Socialism hasn't worked anywhere, so why do voters in New York think it will be different?
Greg Raleigh
Washington, DC
As the worm burrows deeper into the Big Apple, we learn that immutable characteristics like skin color are to be taxed differently.
Here's a haiku for Zo: Big bad Mamdani.
Tax the white, they will take flight.
Then who will you tax?
Paul Bloustein
Cincinnati, Ohio
Admittedly, I am a successful white person who lives in a fairly affluent community with successful families of many races and creeds — a truly wonderful place to live.
It is disgusting for a potential mayor to categorize people and communities by race.
Beyond that, it seems to me that raising property taxes in white communities would benefit the successful families who already live there and harm the very people Mamdani claims to be helping.
It would create an even more difficult financial barrier to success for those who are trying to climb that already difficult ladder.
It will uphold the status quo in the already affluent communities.
Frank Coppotelli
Staten Island
I take Mamdani's comments personally and every white person in our city should feel the same: He says he wants to raise taxes, but only in white neighborhoods.
The nerve of this man to say something like that.
We have enough problems in our city.
Mamdani is only going to cause more if, God forbid, he gets elected.
When we go to the voting booth in November, every single white person should not vote for Mamdani.
If you do, then shame on you.
He is not good for New York City.
Rob Johann
Queens
Mamdani is now targeting white people to pay higher property taxes.
If that's not racist, I'm not sure what defines racism.
Now that he has momentum, it appears that the mass exodus of people fleeing to other American cities will continue to be a reality.
Please leave the liberal hypocrisy behind, for it did nothing but destroy our democracy.
Kevin Judge
Naples. Fla.
Mamdani's plan to redistribute others' money brings the Yiddish noun 'pisher' to mind.
This inexperienced man will drag the Democratic Party to an even lower depth than it is now.
It scares me to think people actually take him seriously.
Phil Serpico
Queens
Want to weigh in on today's stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@nypost.com. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
5 minutes ago
Republican budget bill dismantles climate law passed by Democrats
WASHINGTON -- The sprawling Republican budget bill approved by the Senate Tuesday removes a proposed tax on solar and wind energy projects but quickly phases out tax credits for wind, solar and other renewable energy. The Senate approved the bill 51-50 as President Donald Trump and GOP lawmakers move to dismantle the 2022 climate law passed by Democrats under former President Joe Biden. Vice President JD Vance broke a tie after three Republican senators voted no. The bill now moves to the House for final legislative approval. The excise tax on solar and wind generation projects was added to the Senate bill over the weekend, prompting bipartisan pushback from lawmakers as well as clean energy developers and advocates. The final bill removes the tax but mostly sticks with legislative language released late Friday night and would end incentives for clean energy sooner than a draft version unveiled two weeks ago. Democrats and environmental groups said the GOP plan would crush growth in the wind and solar industry and lead to a spike in Americans' utility bills. The measure jeopardizes hundreds of renewable energy projects slated to boost the nation's electric grid, they said. 'Despite limited improvements, this legislation undermines the very foundation of America's manufacturing comeback and global energy leadership,' said Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association. If the bill becomes law, 'families will face higher electric bills, factories will shut down, Americans will lose their jobs, and our electric grid will grow weaker,'' she said. The American Petroleum Institute, the top lobbying group for the oil and gas industry, applauded the bill's passage. 'This historic legislation will help usher in a new era of energy dominance by unlocking opportunities for investment, opening lease sales and expanding access to oil and natural gas development,'' said Mike Sommers, the group's president and CEO. While Democrats complained that the bill would make it harder to get renewable energy to the electric grid, Republicans said the measure represents historic savings for taxpayers and supports production of traditional energy sources such as oil, natural gas and coal, as well as nuclear power, increasing reliability. In a compromise approved overnight, the bill allows wind and solar projects that begin construction within a year of the law's enactment to get a full tax credit without a deadline for when the projects are 'placed in service,'' or plugged into the grid. Wind and solar projects that begin later must be placed in service by the end of 2027 to get a credit. The bill retains incentives for technologies such as advanced nuclear, geothermal and hydropower through 2032. Changes to the renewable energy language — including removal of the excise tax on wind and solar — were negotiated by a group of Republican senators, including Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Iowa Sens. Joni Ernst and Chuck Grassley. Iowa is a top producer of wind power, while Murkowski is a longtime supporter of renewable energy as crucial for achieving energy independence, particularly for isolated rural communities in Alaska. Murkowski, who voted in favor of the final bill, called her decision-making process 'agonizing.' Changes that push back the timeline for terminating wind and solar credits mean that 'a good number' of Alaska projects would still qualify, she said. 'Again, it's not all we wanted. It could have been worse,' she told reporters Tuesday. Murkowski praised provisions calling for more oil lease sales in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other areas in Alaska and increased revenue sharing. Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, called the bill a 'massively destructive piece of legislation' that 'increases costs for everyone by walloping the health care system, making families go hungry and sending utility bills through the roof.' The bill 'saddles our children and grandchildren with trillions and trillions of dollars in debt — all to serve giant corporations, fossil fuel polluters and billionaire Republican megadonors who are already among the richest people on the planet,' Whitehouse said. Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, the No. 2 Senate Republican, hailed the bill for rescinding many elements of what he called the Biden administration's 'green new scam,' including electric vehicle tax credits that have allowed car owners to lower the purchase price of EVs by $7,500. The bill also blocks for 10 years a first-ever fee on excess methane emissions from oil and gas production. Industry groups fiercely opposed the methane fee, which was authorized by Democrats in the 2022 climate law but never implemented. The GOP bill also increases oil and gas leases on public lands and revives coal leasing in Wyoming and other states. 'Today, the Senate moved President Trump's agenda forward,'' said West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican who chairs the Senate environment committee. Clean energy advocates were deeply disappointed by the bill, which they argue undoes much of the climate law before it fully takes effect. 'By eliminating a number of clean energy incentives and slashing others, this bill represents a significant step backward for America's energy future,' said Nathaniel Keohane, president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, a nonprofit that seeks to accelerate the global transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. 'Curtailing incentives for electricity generated from wind and solar power is particularly shortsighted'' and will raise energy prices for households and businesses and threaten reliability of the electric grid, Keohane said.
Washington Post
12 minutes ago
- Washington Post
National pride in the U.S. sees dramatic decline, Gallup survey finds
Just 58 percent of adults in the United States are 'extremely' or 'very' proud to be American, according to a Gallup poll released this week — the lowest level recorded by the company in the more than two decades since it started including the question in surveys. The dramatic decline was largely driven by Democrats, while most Republicans had strong feelings of national pride, according to the poll published Monday — an indicator of the deepening partisan divide in the U.S. Younger Americans, particularly Gen Z, are also less likely to be proud of their country compared with previous generations.
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' clears final hurdle before House-wide vote
The House Rules Committee has teed up President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" for a chamber-wide vote Wednesday after a nearly 12-hour-long session debating the massive piece of legislation. It now heads to the entire chamber for consideration, where several Republicans have already signaled they're concerned with various aspects of the measure. Just two Republicans voted against reporting the bill out of committee – Reps. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., and Chip Roy, R-Texas, conservatives who had expressed reservations with the bill earlier on Tuesday. No Democrats voted to advance it, while the remaining seven Republicans did. The majority of Republican lawmakers appear poised to advance the bill, however, believing it's the best possible compromise vehicle to make Trump's campaign promises a reality. "This bill is President Trump's agenda, and we are making it law. House Republicans are ready to finish the job and put the One Big Beautiful Bill on President Trump's desk in time for Independence Day," House GOP leaders said in a joint statement after the Senate passed the bill on Tuesday. The House Rules Committee acts as the final gatekeeper before most pieces of legislation get a chamber-wide vote. Democrats attempted to delay the panel's hours-long hearing by offering multiple amendments that were shot down along party lines. They criticized the bill as a bloated tax cut giveaway to wealthy Americans, at the expense of Medicaid coverage for lower-income people. Democrats have also accused Republicans of adding billions of dollars to the national debt, chiefly by extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts. "I don't know what it means to be a fiscal hawk, because if you vote for this bill, you're adding $4 trillion to the debt," Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Calif., said during debate on the measure. "Republicans have gone on TV for months and months and months solemnly insisting to the American people that this bill is going to cut the debt, that this will not hurt anybody on Medicaid, just those lazy bums and, you know, unworthy people." But Republicans have said the bill is targeted relief for middle and working-class Americans, citing provisions temporarily allowing people to deduct taxes from tipped and overtime wages, among others. "If you vote against this bill, you're voting against the child tax credit being at $2,200 per child. At the end of this year, it will drop to $1,000. That makes a huge impact to 40 million hardworking Americans. And it's simply, when they vote no, they're voting against a $2,200 child tax credit, and they're okay with $1,000," House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo., said. "If you listen to the Democrats here, they say this is all about billionaires and millionaires. No tax on tips, no tax on overtime work. How many millionaires and billionaires, Madam Chair, work by the hour?" The bill numbers more than 900 pages and includes Trump's priorities on taxes, the border, defense, energy and the national debt. An initial version passed the House in May by just one vote, but the Senate has since made multiple key modifications to Medicaid, tax cuts and the debt limit. Moderates are wary of the Senate measures that would shift more Medicaid costs to states that expanded their programs under ObamaCare, while conservatives have said those cuts are not enough to offset the additional spending in other parts of the bill. Several key measures were also removed during the "Byrd Bath," a process in the Senate where legislation is reviewed so that it can be fast-tracked under the budget reconciliation process – which must adhere to a strict set of fiscal rules. Among those conservative critics, Reps. Scott Perry, R-Pa., and Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., introduced resolutions to change the Senate version to varying degrees. Ogles' amendment would have most dramatically changed the bill. If passed, it would have reverted the legislation back to the House version. Perry's amendments were aimed at tightening the rollback of green energy tax credits created by the former Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act. Another amendment by Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., would have restored certain Second Amendment-related provisions stripped out by the Byrd Bath. Any changes to the legislation would have forced it back into the Senate, likely delaying Republicans' self-imposed Fourth of July deadline to get the bill onto Trump's desk. The full House is expected to begin considering the bill at 9 a.m. ET Wednesday. Sometime that morning, House lawmakers will vote on whether to begin debating the bill, a procedural measure known as a "rule vote." If that's cleared, a final vote on the bill itself is expected sometime later Wednesday.
