Mamdani balanced NYC's budget and Republicans are hysterical

My name isn't hard to spell correctly, but that challenge defeats Tom.

Tom needs to read the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution. But that number may be too high for him to count.

Tom personifies the MAGA ignorance that condones Trump's continual violations of the Constitution.

The phrase “Congress shall make all laws” comes from Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which states: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” The National Constitution Center

The above is further supported by the supremacy clause that says US laws supercede local laws.

Yes. Federal law supersedes state law, but only in matters that Congress has the constitutional power to legislate. 

Those are listed in article 1 section 8. 

The Pension Protection Act amended ERISA

The funding requirements are codified in 26 USC 412

Government pensions are clearly exempt. 

2)Exceptions

This section shall not apply to........

(C)any governmental plan (within the meaning of section 414(d)),

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/412

There is likely a State law that requires pension funding. 

Tom's hard headed once he loses a point instead of conceding it, he digs deeper into ridiculousness.

ONLY in those matters that are listed in the Constitution as specifically the duty of Congress to legislate.

"Congress shall make all laws" is part of a PHRASE, stupid Tom. It does NOT say that Congress shall make all laws in all jurisdictions, or regarding all issues and topics.

You're being Tom-dishonest when you remove that phrase and take it out of context.

The Supremacy Clause says that A FEDERAL LAW supersedes (that's how you spell it, stupid) a local law IN THE CASE OF BOTH LAWS APPLYING TO THE SAME ISSUE. There are no federal laws regarding PUBLIC pension funds. Therefore, state and local laws apply to the regulation of such funds.

You exhibit very poor understanding of our country's laws. Maybe that's why you're MAGA. You're definitely an idiot, but even an idiot can understand the Constitution--its language is very clear--so I guess you're at the bottom of the idiot heap.

You may as well stop digging.

Re such a state law: I know of no instance wherein a state--any state--is required to keep a shoebox where the pension fund, or the ice cream fund, or the gray squirrel preservation fund, must be kept. The law in such cases is that the state must fund (pension) payments when they come due.

It's not unlike Social Security. Many people do indeed think there's a shoebox with their name on it deep in an underground vault somewhere, but the truth is that the "funding" of Social Security is simply an ironclad promise to pay those benefits to eligible recipients. And frankly, everybody's fine with that promise. And that approach means that instead of a mountain of money stagnating somewhere, those funds can be put to use TODAY.

I know conservatives think that this was the death of our way of life, when we moved from hard currency to fiat currency, and when we moved from shoeboxes to promises. But I'm fine with that, because our government's promises still mean something (Trump notwithstanding). They say they'll pay my SS, I believe they will. They say that my dollar bill is and will remain legal tender, I trust them.

So the issue comes down to: should NYC citizens extend the same level of trust to their municipal government? 

The answer is clear, though kind of back-door. We buy T-Bills because we consider them to be extremely safe investments. The flip side of that is that if T-Bills become worthless or devalued, we'll be having a lot worse problems than that, and the loss of those investments will be small beer compared to whatever else is going wrong. Similarly, if NYC goes bankrupt and can't pay its pension recipients, the whole place will be in a world of hurt, and that will be the least of its problems. So they should be trusted to pay the pensions to eligible recipients, one way or another.

The title of this thread is certainly correct as Tom is hysterical. 

Well, poor Tommie-poo moved from NYC, one of the most fascinating, vibrant, and exciting cities in the world, to Desert Shithole, Arizona, one of the most boring, somnolent, and dull cities. And the thermostat there is going up up up now, as it always does--so maybe poor Tommie-poo is having an act of mover's remorse? Maybe he's wishing he'd never left? He certainly seems to be, um, attentive to every little thing that goes on in that city he left to live on the other side of the continent.

Live - sorry I stand corrected 

But getting back to the original topic; mamdani "balanced" the budget by stealing from people's pension, 1 time payment from the state and unspecified cost savings. 

It wasn't "stealing." You MAGAs don't know what stealing is, since you characterize Trump's grift and theft as "making America great again." And you not only forgive but approve of it, which makes your yeeping here a bit hypocritical.

Why do I say it wasn't stealing? Because it was done LAWFULLY and PUBLICLY. And no pensioner will receive any less than what they have coming. Pension payments will be funded from current revenues. 

You see, stupid Tom, as the population ages, the number of people drawing pensions will increase and the number contributing to the fund will decrease. So at some point, payouts will have to be funded via current contributions, just like Social Security.

The alternative is to finance NYC's shortfall by selling bonds or outright borrowing, both of which are extra costly now because of Trumpflation. And you're a MAGA fiscal conservative, so you hate deficits and yeep yeep yeep about them...when Democrats are in office.