A Mayor who spends his own money!

January 3rd, 2014 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

The SMH reports:

Michael R. Bloomberg loves tropical fish. So when he was elected mayor of New York, he installed two giant aquariums inside City Hall.

The cost to him for having the tanks cleaned out every week for the past 12 years: about $US62,400 ($70,100).

The mayor likes to nosh, too. So he paid to feed his staff daily a light breakfast (coffee, bagels, yogurt) and a modest lunch (tuna salad, peanut butter and jam, sliced fruit).

The bill for his entire mayoralty: about $US890,000.

An analysis by The New York Times shows that Bloomberg has doled out at least $US650 million ($730 million) on a wide variety of perks and bonuses, political campaigns and advocacy work, charitable giving and social causes, not to mention travel and lodging, connected to his time and role as mayor. (His estimated tab for a multiday trip to China, with aides and security in tow: $US500,000.)

In the process, he has entirely upended the financial dynamics surrounding New York’s top job.

In the past, the city paid its mayor; Bloomberg paid to be the city’s mayor.

In moves that would make a financial planner’s head spin, he rejected the $US2.7 million worth of salary to which he was entitled (accepting just $US1 a year) and, starting in 2001, turned on a spigot of cash that has never stopped gushing.

I wonder if he would like to be Mayor of Auckland?

Tags:

22 Responses to “A Mayor who spends his own money!”

  1. Longknives (4,048 comments) says:

    Len wouldn’t even pay for Commercial cleaners to clean up the wank stains in his office….

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    Lusty Len didn’t even pay for his own condoms. Bevan or the ratepayers did. :D

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Nostalgia-NZ (4,688 comments) says:

    Auckland doesn’t have a Mayor, only a counterfeit fraud.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. KiwiGreg (3,129 comments) says:

    Don’t worry, the new Mayor of New York is going to make Brown look like a free market capitalist.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. MikeG (359 comments) says:

    How about PM of NZ? The Parliamentary cleaners could do with a bit extra.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. F E Smith (3,273 comments) says:

    I wonder if he would like to be Mayor of Auckland?

    Why? So that he can regulate the size of Aucklander’s soft drinks? Or ban the smoking of e-cigarettes in public places?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Don the Kiwi (1,318 comments) says:

    Bloomberg might be being nice and philanthropic, but so he should be.
    The finances of NY City are a basket case under his watch – just another bloody socialist who loves spending otherpeople’s money as well as his own. When Giuliani was mayor before him, the city had a balanced budget and surpluses.
    NY now is massively indebted, and is on the verge of bankruptcy, just like Chicago, Los Angeles and Detroit which has already gone.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. stephieboy (1,127 comments) says:

    Oh Dear! and the New York voters have elected a Liberal the first time since 1993. Shock, Horror, Outrage.,

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/06/nyregion/de-blasio-is-elected-new-york-city-mayor.html?_r=0

    I can imagine our resident far right wing nutters collapsing tearfully and hysterically into each others arms,!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. scrubone (2,971 comments) says:

    I can imagine our resident far right wing nutters collapsing tearfully and hysterically into each others arms,!

    You need to get out more.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. F E Smith (3,273 comments) says:

    the New York voters have elected a Liberal

    No, Bloomberg was a Liberal.  De Blasio is a hard-Leftist.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Fletch (5,721 comments) says:

    stephieboy, yep, he is Communist.

    WASHINGTON,  January 1, 2014 — Comrade Bill De Blasio was sworn in this morning as the Mayor of New York City.

    “Comrade” is the right title for the new mayor. De Blasio is an unrepentant Marxist, though he does not like to use that term. De Blasio is the guy who was cheering for the Sandinistas in Nicaragua in the 1980s while real Americans were trying to free that nation from Marxist tyranny. De Blasio is the comrade who showed his solidarity with communism in 1991 by taking his honeymoon to Cuba

    Yes, while much of the world was being liberated from communist oppression, De Blasio did his part to support communism by going on a honeymoon in communist Cuba. Any bets on whether he tried to visit political prisoners in Castro’s jails?

    De Blasio is starting off his reign as dictator of New York by dictating. 

    He is dictating a group of people out of their jobs. These are the iconic horse drawn carriages in New York. De Blasio doesn’t like them and has claimed that somehow it is “inhumane.” A few days ago at a press conference he said, “We are going to get rid of the horse carriages. Period.”

    http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/judson-phillips-cold-hard-truth/2014/jan/1/new-york-city-comrade-mayor-sworn/

    Mr. de Blasio became an ardent supporter of the Nicaraguan revolutionaries. He helped raise funds for the Sandinistas in New York and subscribed to the party’s newspaper, Barricada, or Barricade. When he was asked at a meeting in 1990 about his goals for society, he said he was an advocate of “democratic socialism.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/nyregion/a-mayoral-hopeful-now-de-blasio-was-once-a-young-leftist.html?pagewanted=1&ref=billdeblasio

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    @stephie, taking a break between female power and feminist courses and lectures?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. virtualmark (1,421 comments) says:

    Rich pricks eh.

    Just always taking from society. I ask you, just what have they ever done for us?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. dime (8,752 comments) says:

    “I wonder if he would like to be Mayor of Auckland?”

    hope not, i like soft drinks

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Hugh Pavletich (39 comments) says:

    Hyperlinks from Section 2 of “Christchurch: The Way Forward” …

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1206/S00251/christchurch-the-way-forward.htm

    NZ Local Government elected representatives are paid way way above their Australian counterparts …

    http://www.cis.org.au/publications/ideasthecentre/article/2835-comparative-costs-of-councillors

    NZ Local Government employees are paid way way above their North American counterparts …

    http://www.texastribune.org/library/data/government-employee-salaries/

    WHY ?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Steve (North Shore) (4,323 comments) says:

    See how it’s done Len?
    Respect is earned, not demanded

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Johnboy (13,386 comments) says:

    “The mayor likes to nosh, too. So he paid to feed his staff daily a light breakfast (coffee, bagels, yogurt) and a modest lunch (tuna salad, peanut butter and jam, sliced fruit).”

    I can’t see Len shouting for a chinese for all his staff somehow! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Duxton (546 comments) says:

    Neither should he, Johnboy. Just because he likes eating Chinese, doesn’t mean everyone else has to……

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. SPC (4,654 comments) says:

    In ancient Greece people would campaign for office by offering to spend their personal wealth on public projects if they were elected.

    It’s just unfortunate that the USA has a small elite of super wealthy capable of doing this in a society with more people in it. Meaning a even greater disparity of wealth than in ancient times.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. F E Smith (3,273 comments) says:

    It’s just unfortunate that the USA has a small elite of super wealthy capable of doing this

    While Bloomberg and Romney certainly fit in that category, Obama doesn’t.  Or didn’t.  His ability to fundraise, and his willingness to continue fundraising whilst in office, meant that he was able to outspend his two rivals quite significantly.  

    The fact is that while the left decries business spending on electoral candidates, they usually outspend their right wing opponents quite significantly, especially with their union backing.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. SPC (4,654 comments) says:

    It is not what you make it out to be.

    The USA has matching funds for Presidential campaigns – but there are rules for qualifying (only matches smaller donations) and the Rep right is less likely to seek matching funds and be subject to those rules.

    And there right wing PACS and funded lobby groups outspend unions.

    Smashing the unions has had payoffs for the political right in dominating election spending here in New Zealand.

    The left does not have more money than the right to spend anywhere in the world.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. F E Smith (3,273 comments) says:

    The USA has matching funds for Presidential campaigns

    From memory, Obama took no federal funds at all in 2008, because to do so would have limited how or when he could spend it.  Obama raised $US778 million to McCain’s $US384 million, both men spending almost all of that.

    In that election, the US unions spent at least $US200 million in support of Obama.  That is what they were required to report, but they aren’t required to report everything.

    According the NYT, the WSJ, and AP, the actual spending by unions was probably north of $US450 million, pretty much entirely in support of Obama and the Democrats.

    Whereas, according to NRO,

    Additionally, the limited amount Big Business does spend through traditional PACs goes to incumbents of all stripes and is thus split between parties. According to data from Opensecrets.org, in the 2010 elections traditional PACs gave $238,450,722 to Democrats and $181,565,844 to Republicans — a 57 to 43 percent split favoring Democrats.

    Coming to the conclusion that

    Unions spent more than any other outside groups in 2008 and 2010

    which is pretty much the point that I am making.

    However, I can confidently say that your statement that

    The left does not have more money than the right to spend anywhere in the world.

    is completely and utterly false.  One example is the NSW state elections in the last dozen years, where the ALP has outspent the Coalition by sometimes as much as 2.5:1* or better, and that is before you take union campaigning into account.

    Indeed, the unions spend so much in support of the ALP that when NSW prohibited donations by corporates and unions in election campaigns, it was the unions who went to court to get the law quashed!

    *In 2003 the ALP spent $AU11.3 million vs the Coalition’s $AU4.3 million, while in 2007 the ALP spent $AU16.8 million vs the Coatlition’s $AU7 million.  That is not including union campaigning on behalf of the ALP.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.