Loading summary
Transcript107 lines
- [00:00]
A
Foreign. Welcome back to Firewall. I'm your host, Bradley Tusk. It's a Tuesday episode. So this is our friend and producer, Hugo Lindgren. Hugo, how are you?
- [00:15]
B
I'm good. I want to, I want to tell a short little story. So yesterday we're recording on Monday, this comes out Tuesday. But on, on Sunday there was the knockout round sort of viewing party at
- [00:25]
A
the store here for the Canada, South Africa.
- [00:29]
B
Yeah. And Russ and daughter supplied some bagels and there were $5 mimosas. And it was such a good vibe.
- [00:37]
A
What was the attendance like?
- [00:39]
B
You know, I was only here for the first half, but it was a nice crowd. People drifted in. Then a lot of people just stayed. Cause one of the things that happened, and I think this was really the intention of doing these things in the first place, is it was a great way for non crazy sports fans to enjoy the game without like sitting there drinking beer.
- [00:56]
A
It's a little crazy. Yeah.
- [00:57]
B
Like it just had such a, like so many just looked up and then they're like, nice.
- [01:00]
A
Do we have another one?
- [01:02]
B
We have a bunch more. I don't know what the schedule is for the knockout, so you should look it up. But there are more coming up. Cool.
- [01:07]
A
The World cup just has, when I was there, it just has that vibe, right? Yeah, it's just a nice vibe.
- [01:12]
B
It was, it was really terrific. I, I, I was so I, I left here just feeling very upbeat about like the, the role that the store plays in the community. Like, it was really third space. It was really, it was a term
- [01:22]
A
that I didn't even know till like a year ago.
- [01:24]
B
Right.
- [01:24]
A
It turns out to actually, I think, look, even though this wasn't, when I think about the things that, I mean, you were part of this whole process that we all wanted for the store when we were first conceiving of the idea. So this would have been like six years ago at this point. Third space was not one of them. Right. I mean, the amphitheater was obviously a big part of it, but for events. But I do think that maybe the world, especially post Covid, just needs more places where people can kind of just be together. And I think the more and more we live behind our screens, the more important it becomes. And so, yeah, I mean, look, when I think about my goal today for the store. So I was coming down, Lyle and I were in San Francisco last week and I was, we were flew back on Friday. And if you are at the American terminal at jfk, there's sort of a, I don't know if you know, this, remember this? But there's like, as you're going down the escalator to baggage claim, on the wall, there's kind of a red grooms. Like it's not red grooms, but it felt like it kind of collage of New York City, brightly colored, it's fun to look at while you're going on the escalator.
- [02:27]
B
Yeah.
- [02:28]
A
And they have spec places like Russ and Daughters was on there. And like my goal one day would be have like P and T knitwear on there.
- [02:34]
B
Right.
- [02:35]
A
Meaning just like that it has enough cultural significance to people that it matters enough to people. They see it as a kind of cultural landmark of New York City. And you know, I guess the third space thing is part of that.
- [02:48]
B
Well, this was definitely an expression of that for sure. And it, you know, it was obviously planned and put together and yet those things sort of take on a life of their own too. And that's kind of what happened. You know, just the vibe was there. So it was really, it was really nice.
- [03:01]
A
Cool. All right, so today we're going to talk about three things. One is an analysis in a different way than I think what you've seen so far of the elections in New York last week. Two is in a day or two we'll be at Mondami's six month anniversary. And so I wrote a review of it of his first six months for Vital City and did a run this week and we'll talk through that. And the third is my favorite books from the first half of 2026.
- [03:28]
B
Great. I should just mention up top, we're going to have your friend Micah on the podcast later this week. Yeah, yeah, he'll be talking a little bit about him.
- [03:36]
A
We are, we're so excited for him.
- [03:38]
B
So.
- [03:38]
A
And he's actually not, he's, he's only kind of inadvertently in this first segment that we're talking about in that it we're going to talk about one of his opponents, Alex Boris. But, but when you look at the primaries from last week in New York, and just for the listeners who might not have followed it, there were kind of four big congressional races and in three of them the DSA candidate, the far left socialist, anti Israel candidate, one in two cases beating incumbents, and then the other one wasn't really a DSA candidate, but Lasher, who did win, is kind of a more traditional liberal, I would say. But when you look at it and you look at how the media analyzes it, because they tend to, as you know, as a former member of the media kind of go for the most sensational thing. It's, well, everyone hates Israel or AI or the 1% or whatever it is. And that is true for those who voted for the DSA candidates, obviously. But I think even though those are powerful political narratives, that really the public faces something a lot more obvious and deeper, which is simply that people are unhappy. The world is scary. People have no faith in government or really any major institution. Technological change is happening extremely quickly and voters feel a lot of anxiety. And they want to feel like that anxiety is being seen and heard. And they don't want to be told that everything is okay as is. They don't want to hear empty poll tested slogans from candidates who clearly don't believe them. They want to know simply that their life will get easier, they will feel more secure. And they also want someone to blame for why they feel so bad right now. And it doesn't really matter actually, if the solutions presented to them are totally unworkable. I mean, when you think about Mondamis, and we'll get into this later, but promises when ran for mayor, like, I think my guess is that even though they were very deceptive in the sense that he promised things that he didn't have the authority to actually do, I'm not actually sure if people realize that or not. They might have realized it and not care. They just want to know that someone is sort of looking out for them. Same thing with Trump. And I think that they also don't care if the people who are being blamed are being treated totally unfairly. Right. You know, people on the left feel outraged when the people who Trumps blame are treated unfairly. And people on the right are outraged when people who the left blames or treat unfairly. But I don't think that the people who are looking to feel seen and heard particularly careful. And Trump understood that in 2016, long before the other Republican candidates, Bernie Sanders understood it. And he almost beat Hillary in the primary because she was such an embodiment of the status quo. And it hasn't changed. And the New York City mayor race last year, sort of the perfect example. Right. So Mondame was a reflection of the anxiety that many New Yorkers today feel. He's a happy, go lucky reflection of that anxiety, but a reflection nonetheless. And he recognized that a large group of voters feel like their lives aren't what they want it to be and that winning that support meant promising to make life more affordable and to exact revenge on those who they see as the bad guys. And Trump did the same thing with Maga, but he used instead of the 1% or Israel or capitalism, he used coastal elites in all their institutions and orthodoxies as his boogeyman. And this is not new. I mean, demagogues have been doing this since the beginning of time. And the response last year in the mayoral New York was totally predictable. They just threw money at the problem. Andrew Cuomo spent two and a half times as much of Mondame. He was as conventional, status quo as it gets. All these rich guys at these hedge funds just thought, oh, well, money is the solution to every problem in life. And I told them it wasn't going to work, but they didn't listen. And OpenAI, I think, learned the same lesson last week. So they were mad. Alex Boris was one of the candidates running in the election. And normally speaking, it's a new district because we had redistricting not too long ago, but overall, it combined the east side and the west side of Manhattan, from 14th street up and up to about Harlem. And the west side is just more politically active and engaged. And so the turnout is typically a lot, lot higher. So, like when Jerry Nadler, who was the retiring congressman for that seat, had to run against Carolyn Maloney, who was sort of the longtime Eastside congressman, who
- [07:37]
B
I was an intern for, by the way, when she worked in the City Council.
- [07:40]
A
So at City hall, as council members. Yeah, yeah, I remember that. He kicked their ass, mainly because he was a better politician, I guess, in his own weird way, but mainly because the west side is just so much more active. So Boris sponsored legislation in New York called the Raise act, which actually helped him with. And it created a regulatory framework for frontier models. And OpenAI's response was, if you dare to criticize AI, we will crush you. And they spent $8 million through a new York trying to crush him, opposing him, and it backfired completely. By making Boris the enemy of AI, they gave him a seat at the anxiety table. They brought in even more spending for him from other people who otherwise wouldn't have participated, and they propelled his candidacy. He still lost, and I'm glad he did, simply because Micah is my friend. Although Alex would have been a perfectly good congressman. But he lost by four points. And I think that him losing by a lot less than he would have otherwise is thanks specifically to OpenAI opposing him. So are the people at the ideological extremes, whether it's Trump or Vance or Sanders, Mondami, Arac, are they fundamentally different from everyone else? I mean, I think they're a lot smarter politically but in terms of their aims of using public anxiety to give them power, no. And I'm not totally equating the people that you said on the left with the corruption and cynicism of Trump, but nonetheless, they're all deliberately manipulating people's anxiety to enrich and empower themselves one way or another. And they're capitalizing on technology, the understanding word about the rising cost of living, widespread economic inequality, a racially changing makeup of a nation, a physical environment that feels more and more harsh and extreme, a World Left behind screens a society that fully equates happiness with wealth and status, and that leaves so many people to feel inadequate, mistreated, and left behind. And, you know when you feel like you're working harder and harder to keep up and you're told your job may go away entirely because of AI, and when things like a totally unnecessary war drive up your gas prices or tariffs drive up the cost of everything else, you're pissed off. Right? And so if you're the people in the center, like you, like me, who are the consistent losers in this new political dynamic? Here's what I know. The answer can't be more of the same. It can't just be thrown even more money at the problem using the same failed tactics. Ironically, the same hedge fund guys who believe that are the same ones who, when we look at, like, for example, New York City spends $43 billion a year in its public schools for worse and worse results. They're like, see, you can't just solve the problem with money. And yet they think just that when it comes to politics. And it's not just the hedge fund guys. But, you know, when those of us in the center, whether we're independents or Democrats or Republicans, it's not gonna change till we start actually hearing why people are upset and giving them solutions and creating organizations that truly address those concerns. And I mean actual policy solutions, not just, you know, testing things in a poll and then repeating it one way or the other. And it's not about ice, right? I mean, those are great trigger points to sort of mobilize the extremes, but you gotta give people real things that they believe could actually happen, and it makes them feel heard. And that's a lot harder than being an extremist, right? If you're an extremist, you just blame people, and the left is leaning into 5,700 years of anti Semitism and you manipulate voters, right? But when you have to present sensible ideas that can work in reality and also differs from state to state, region to region, it's really hard, but it also has to be done right. And here in New York, at least, it has to start with the same hard work at the far left has done now for decades. They've brought people together. They hear their thoughts, their concerns. They recruit candidates, they train candidates, they develop policies that resonate. They develop real grassroots operations in armies. And as much as I disagree with the DSA on so many issues, they've put in the work and they're seeing the results. And if the people in the center who run major institutions are doing well in life, want to stop losing elections, they can't just keep trying the same failed strategy over and over again and suddenly hoping that it works. And I think Tuesday was just a perfect example of that, as was the mayor oil race last year, as was the presidential race the year before. And different results on different sides, but it's sort of the same thing. And is the leadership there to do that, both here in New York and nationally? I don't know. You need the people with money and power to recognize that what comes naturally to them may not be the right approach, that they may not be the right leaders for this moment, that the answer's a lot less glamorous and far more grueling than high profile fundraisers in the Hamptons and ominous TV commercials. It requires humility, it requires a willingness to change. It requires a lot of hard work and it requires a lot of very successful people to start realizing that they don't know what they don't know. So I hope it can happen, but I'm not holding my breath.
- [12:17]
B
Tell me what the nature of the phone calls you've gotten in the last week after the election versus like other elections.
- [12:23]
A
You know what I mean?
- [12:25]
B
Are people panicking?
- [12:27]
A
They are, but I really got sort of two categories of calls. I got a lot of calls from reporters.
- [12:33]
B
Right. And then are they pushing narratives that you are skeptical of or like.
- [12:38]
A
They weren't really pushing narratives per se. I mean, you know, they sort of. I'm not saying reporters are lazy, but human beings tend to take the path of least resistance. And so there's a ready made narrative. I find that most reporters sort of are very happy to jump into that.
- [12:53]
B
Right.
- [12:54]
A
I don't know. Was your experience different as a reporter or editor? You know, it's funny, you're a contrarian personally, but that's.
- [13:01]
B
But also the way that you experience the press is so different than the way I. I mean, I used to have some interaction with the political reporters and I was always kind of Amazed how different it was than the. I mean, it really is a. It's about sources and about managing sources and getting what you want out of each sort of person, you know?
- [13:20]
A
Yeah, there are definitely. I felt like, for example, Mara Gay, who's now in the New York Times editorial board when she was a reporter at the Journal. I remember she would literally tell you what she wanted the quote to be. It was, she constructed the entire story in her head and then worked backwards to find people to repeat it out loud. And it's actually perfect that she became editorial writer because now, at least she speaks for herself.
- [13:40]
B
I remember hearing.
- [13:41]
A
But she was, like, the most unethical reporter I ever dealt with, or one of them.
- [13:45]
B
I remember hearing reporters do that when I'd be in the newsroom sometimes. And they do exactly what you're talking about.
- [13:51]
A
Yeah. And then the other category was certainly from people who were panicked. But here's what I don't get anymore. I realize the establishment doesn't call me because I criticize them so openly and frequently.
- [14:03]
B
Right.
- [14:04]
A
Like, there was a piece in the Real Deal where I talked to Eric Ehrenquist, who's a great, great editor and reporter there, and I think I just blatantly called Rebny lazy in an app. So these people, whether it's the partnership, although I do like Steve or Rodney or just various business leaders, hedge funds, whatever, they're not calling me. They might call Chris. I think they have.
- [14:24]
B
Right.
- [14:25]
A
But they know that I'm just going to take them to task and they don't want to hear it. Yeah.
- [14:29]
B
And what I mean, are you. Are you more optimistic than generally people are, you know, sanguine. What are you?
- [14:38]
A
I'm not. I think the difference is if you work on my core belief that every policy output comes from political input, I know what's causing the policy outputs that we're getting today. I know how to change them. I'm trying very hard through mobile voting. It's the most scalable solution nationally. It's very fucking hard. I ran five bills this year and lost all of them. Um, but on a local level, I'm sort of torn between one of two things. Part of me is like, all right, if the center truly wanted to do something new, like create a version of the DSA for the center, I would help with it. But on the flip side, I can usually get my shit done. So, like, when I have issues that I care about. Brokers, fees, too much scaffolding, illegal weed, shops, tele, abortion, school meals, age verification, I lost the One on. I had one and then lost it on ebikes because of fucking Mandami or, you know, age verification for gambling apps. New York, whatever it is, I can get my shit done, right? I don't have the problem of not being able to get the right policy outputs because I'm able to sort of work the political inputs on that specific issue to achieve my goal. So I don't need this personally, when I care about something like, I don't just completely. But obviously a more.
- [15:53]
B
A less polarized, crazy political environment is good for you, for sure.
- [15:58]
A
For sure. It's good for New York, right? For everybody, you know, but, like, I guess I am so tired of banging my head against the wall for all of these people who think that just because they made money in real estate or finance or they inherited it or the fuck it is, that they know everything about everything. That, like, I'm. I'm done trying to convince them, right? I'm. I'm just gonna do what I can do, whether it's in New York or nationally on all the different things that I care about. I'm pretty effective in getting my stuff done, although certainly was not this year in terms of mobile voting legislation or hunger, by the way. We had a terrible fucking year. But putting that aside, we're regrouping and coming up with new approaches and strategies and everything else.
- [16:35]
B
So.
- [16:36]
A
No, I mean, if someone who considers themselves part of the kind of the ruling class of New York City that is causing them to lose election after election hears this and genuinely wants to sort of talk about doing things differently, please give me a call. But I highly suspect that's not the case.
- [16:53]
B
Well, we'll have more on this election with Mike, obviously.
- [16:56]
A
On the other hand.
- [16:56]
B
Yeah.
- [16:56]
A
And this is a good pivot into the next thing, which is, you know, July 1st, Mark Mondami sort of, you know, the second half of his first year. And so I thought I would. I wrote up, and Vital Cities is running, as I said, a kind of review of his first six months. And I split two categories. Mandami is politician and Mandami is leader. So. And I think they're two very different stories, Right? It's a tale of two mayors. Politically, he is a generational talent. His charisma is off the charts. His instincts are usually impeccable. I literally not sure there's enough superlatives to describe it from a polling perspective. The last poll I saw was early May. Sienna had him at a 56% approval compared to the de Blasio at 50%. In August of his first term. And Adams at 43 in May of his first term. I suspect that since the Knicks won the title, it's actually gone up because people just.
- [17:50]
B
The Knicks, when he made John Lindsay like popular.
- [17:53]
A
Right. Right. Until he fucked up the snow. Or was that. Did he fuck up the snow before or after? I think before, but that was his defining.
- [18:00]
B
Wasn't the snow right after he got elected?
- [18:02]
A
And that's what I don't know.
- [18:03]
B
Or was it the trash?
- [18:04]
A
I wasn't.
- [18:04]
B
But 69, Mets, jets and Knicks all win and how could you not get reelected?
- [18:08]
A
Right, Right. But I think if you poll today, that would be even higher than it was.
- [18:12]
B
Sure.
- [18:12]
A
And social media he's picked up. He had 7.5 million followers on Instagram when he was elected, which is incredible. Now it's over 11 million. So that's just remarkable growth for anyone, let alone a politician. His performance in the elections last was phenomenal. All the candidates he supported won literally a 10 out of 10 performance there. It made him a true leader in the Democratic Party nationally. And then another way to look at his political performance is how his agenda fared in places he doesn't control. So like Albany. And I think he did okay. It's obviously not as strong as his social media or his polling or his endorsements, but he didn't get his major things. He didn't get an income tax increase, he didn't get a corporate tax increase, he didn't get free buses. He didn't get the funding for universal childcare. But he also didn't come away empty handed. Right. So Hochul, who was already a very strong proponent of subsidizing childcare, announced $1.2 billion in expansion of city funded childcare right after Mondami took office. I think she would have done it anyway, but I think it certainly did not hurt that you had a mayor who made it a centerpiece of his campaign. And also Albany bailed out the city with $8 billion in money over two years to help them with the budget deficit. So that's significant too. The Pieda terror attacks I think is an interesting story politically because substantively it's a disaster. Right. We'll get into it. But Effectively he put 15,000 jobs in things like construction and IT and security on the line in order to boost his own standing with his base. Cuz it was a very meager win and he had to make it seem like it was a real win. And so he picked a fight with Ken Griffin. The media of course, took the bait. Immediately and made it now seem like a really good fight for his base, that he was fighting against the corporate overlords. From a revenue standpoint, it's a couple hundred million dollars a year. It's not that significant. He's kind of termed Trump. Whether that's prevented Trump from doing bad things to New York, I don't know. It's hard to say because Trump's own relationship with New York is so complicated. Obviously he's been here a lot longer than Mandani, so who the fuck knows with Trump? But maybe it helped. And then the final way to assess his political performance is to look at his campaign promises. Right? And this is where it gets a little challenging. Cuz his narrative was deceptive from day one. Right. Most of the things he promised are things the mayor doesn't the power to deliver. But you know, most people don't know the breakdown between city and state jurisdiction on any given issue. Right. So like if you take the buses. One of the reasons that I wanted when I was running Mike's campaign in 09, him to make mayoral control of the subways and buses the centerpiece of the campaign was my argument to him was one, you would do it a lot better than it's done now. But two, people already think you run it, so you just get blamed for this thing that you have no control over. Might as well actually take responsibility for it. So when Madame said free buses, I think most voters assume that he runs the buses and could do that. Although again, I do, to the earlier point of the podcast, I do think that even if some voters might have known that he couldn't deliver most of these things, but just they still felt heard and seen and totally they were symbolic. But that's one, two. The city on grocery store, obviously is an absurd concept. They're spending $30 million to build a store that won't be rented for four years or something like that. Three years, 2029. The rent freeze did happen, but you know, de Blasio did it three times in his eight year tenure. And no one thinks that housing is any cheaper now than it was before. And in fact, if anything, it drives up the price of all the other apartments in the city, so freezes the rent for 20 years.
- [21:49]
B
There are some development deals that I don't know if they're in the pipeline yet, but they are promising, right?
- [21:53]
A
Yeah, yeah, for sure. And I will say, and we'll get to it, but think that the Mandami housing team at least seems to be embracing the notion that you need to build abundance. Right. So that's. That's good. Obviously, there's no income tax increase. Childcare is certainly not universal, but. But there is funding. Whether you want to credit him for that or not is unclear. I assume Hoko would say he had nothing to do with it and it was her. Her thing. I assume he would say it was because of him on Israel. You know, look, he used the issue very intelligently politically. Now, I don't think it's just a political tool for him. So two ways to look at this. First is that since 1948, New York politicians have seen Israel supporting Israel as a political benefit and have done so. Many of them are Jewish, though. That adds another element to it, but also because it was in their political interests. Right. Mandami understood that the combination of. Of the left being frustrated and Jews always, throughout history being kind of the easy person to blame, combined with the way that Bibi kind of extended the war in Gaza, combined with the fact that there are almost now as many Muslims in New York City as Jews, that he went the other way with it. And he used anti Semitism and anti Zionism, and I do believe they're the same thing. Doesn't mean you have to support everything Israel does. I don't support Netanyahu and hope that he loses in October, but I think that for a people who are continually the target of genocide, that when there's finally a place where they can be safe and you support eliminating that place, you are an anti Semite. But either way, Mondami certainly used it effectively and he continues to drive the issue. The thing I kind of wonder about almost is it may be the only thing he actually cares about and believes in. I think everything else is just politics to him. And I think the one thing that he truly, desperately wants to see happen in the world is for Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth. So that's interesting. But, you know, for now, it's. Despite what everyone.
- [23:55]
B
Interesting is such a. Like. Like sort of neutral way.
- [23:57]
A
Sorry. It is politically advantageous for him. And I think that for those of us who are Zionists, we can't just keep screaming anti Semitism and expect a different outcome. Right. You and I did a whole podcast on what I think needs to be done so people can check that out. So that's him as the politician, but what about him as a leader? Right. So look, being a mayor is very unique if you're a legislator at any level. Right. City council, state, federal, you know, your work's not that tangible. Right. You just kind of like sponsor bills, you have press conferences, whatever. A governor is tangible, but a lot of kind of. When I was deputy governor of Illinois, about half of our work felt like it was direct services and running things, and half of it was kind of regulating things like schools. Right. And so for Mondani, though, as a mayor, the work is very real. It's. Are the streets safe? Are the schools effective? Are the parks clean? And one of the challenges for him is that being a great politician and being a great leader often conflict and making your base happy keeps you strong politically, but oftentimes at the expense of the people that you're supposed to represent. So. So let's start with the good policing. He really did one thing, which is not firing Jesse Tisch, but it was a big thing. Right. Cuz she is a great police commissioner. She's doing a great job because of her own kind of personal independence and financial independence because of her family. She's pretty immune from a lot of politics and things like that. Police force is still depleted. She needs more resources. She needs more cops. It's hard to do during a budget crisis. I know Mondami is based on a lot of people who would just abolish the police altogether, but her performance has been great. Major crime is down 5.3%, murders are down 28%. So he deserves all the credit for keeping her. The budget is the biggest test of a mayor's management chops, and it's a total mess. He declared success and I know it played well on TikTok, but the reality is totally different. Right. So he's facing a $6 billion budget deficit, which he inherited, he did not cause, but he's solving the problem through two things. Bailouts from Albany and gimmicks. And that's it. He's deferring pension payments and just finding ways to effectively create. Create more debt to not have to face the issues today.
- [26:11]
B
Not the first mayor in history to do that.
- [26:13]
A
No, no. But Bloomberg didn't do that. Mondami did appoint these saving officers at agencies, but let's see what they actually come up with. Right now it feels like most things he does are great on comms and perception and lacking on substance. So I'm not really willing to believe in these saving officers until they A, come up with good ideas and then B, more importantly, the really meaningful ideas are all going to involve political pain like layoffs and things like that. And let's see if he has the balls to do it. I'm betting he does not So I just think that there's so much room for savings in this budget, right? You have a school system with 127,000 fewer kids than we used to and a $43 billion budget. And he wants to put 3 billion more into it. Under this theory that the left seems to have, where spending and outcomes are exactly the same thing. As long as you're spending money on the problem, you're solving the problem. But we have a school system where 20% of the kids don't graduate, half are not College ready. Saw sat to 38% dropout after the first six months of college. So more money alone is not the answer. And you have to have the courage to stand up for the teachers unions. And it does not seem to me that he does whatsoever. The other thing is you could find so much more efficiency in government just by using AI for procurement, for compliance, for licensing, permitting, facilities management, data management. And over time, that could save billions of dollars a year and make city services much more effective. But if you believe in, you know, the biggest possible government workforce, which de Blasio certainly did, and you're afraid of the unions, then you're not going to say, let's cut 30,000 middle managers to be able to balance the budget or reinvest in more in childcare or free buses or whatever it is. Somehow economic development's even worse. The deputy mayor for economic justice testified before the city council about her progress and job creation to date. And she could point to the city owned grocery store, which is $30 million to build and won't open until 2029. And modular public bathrooms, I mean, literally, if you're trying to skewer them satirically, you'd be like, that's a bridge too far and that's their reality, right?
- [28:18]
B
And wait, have you seen one of these modular public bathrooms?
- [28:22]
A
Not in the US I've seen them elsewhere. Okay, look, public bathrooms are very vexing issue, right? When I worked at the Parks Department, this was always an issue.
- [28:31]
B
That was really, the bathrooms in Washington
- [28:33]
A
Square park are fine, so you can build them and they have real value in the sense that people need them. On the flip side, they're really hard to maintain because bad shit goes down on them all the time. They just get very heavy. Even if everyone's treating them well, it still just gets wild amount of usage. City employees tend to sort of not always be as dedicated as you want to things like maintenance. And then also they can just be dangerous, right? So like at a playground, you know, like some pervert lurks in the bathroom. That's a problem. Right. So it's really hard because they're both. And so people keep trying and they spend a couple of million dollars per bathroom or whatever it is, and usually it fails. I'd love to see it succeed at some point. But generally speaking, it has been something that no mayor that I've really noticed anywhere in the US Been able to successfully do. They can't find anyone to run edc, the Economic Development Corporation. They have no real dialogue and they
- [29:30]
B
sort of recast that as an economic justice.
- [29:32]
A
Well, that. The definition of economic justice. Yeah. It's just ridiculous. You know, maybe just having people getting
- [29:40]
B
salaries, that's a kind of justice, right?
- [29:42]
A
Yeah, exactly. Well, I think they think that. I think that they think. I mean, when you look at the economic policy of the far left, what it really is is a wealth transfer from the top decile to the second and third decile, right? It's tax the 1% as much as possible and then give people who are in the kind of 10th to 30th percent that money in the form of subsidies and things like rent freezes and childcare subsidies and things like that. The reality is, if you truly believe in justice and you truly believe in wealth redistribution, everyone until the 49th, 9th percent of income should pay more in taxes. And then everyone on the other side should pay less. And the people in the first 49.9% should not get government subsidies, and the people in the other 50.1 or whatever should. Right? So you never hear Mondami calling for raising taxes on his own base. Right? It's always on people who don't vote for him already. And we'll get to that. But, like, there's no, you know, for example, like I talked to the mayor's office about these meetings that they about with tech leaders and all of that. They never followed up. All bullshit, all nonsense on affordability. Here's the thing. Some of his ideas, like buses or childcare subsidies or rent freezes, they're again, they're wealth transfers. And they may not be bad ideas entirely, but none of this is the affordability, right? So take the grocery stores. Like, he doesn't control commodity prices or tariffs or the supply chain or harvests or inflation. So, yeah, he could artificially subsidize prices at the grocery stores, which obviously then puts the privately owned grocery stores and bodegas at a disadvantage. But that's just because he's taking money away from something else, Right? He's not actually making anything more affordable. Free buses aren't free. Still got to pay to operate them. It's just a funding transfer and that's all it is. So I'd like to at least see when you're screaming about justice, some intellectual honesty. And the same people screaming should be screaming raise my taxes unless they make below the median income. Right. But of course they never will operationally. Don't really know yet. I think they have some good ideas around scaffolding and public lighting and curb management. I think his approach to snow removal was interesting. He says he's filled a hundred thousand potholes. There's something called the Mayor's Management Report. It'll come out in September. If the numbers are reported honestly, then we'll have a sense of how he's doing. The problem is, for a mayor who ran on campaign promises that were completely deceptive and its whole economic justice argument is completely deceptive, it's hard to believe that they will report the numbers with integrity. There are some other accomplishments. I think they brag about recovering 44 million in restitutions for consumer tenant protections. That's in a city with a GDP of 1.35 trillion. So it doesn't mean all that much. Schools are a fucking disaster. The chancellor's under investigation for awarding sketchy contracts. The system itself is failing miserably. You haven't even heard Madame really talk about it in a meaningful way. I don't think he gives a shit about it. And in terms of his choices as a leader. We've taught this before. But when you won't break up homeless encampments because of ideology and 18 people die, or you won't require facial recognition to keep keep kids off of e bikes who shouldn't be on them and kids are physically at risk. Or you choose to publicly humiliate Ken Griffin and risk 15,000 jobs just because you want the controversy on social media, or even when you oppose members of the congressional delegation who can deliver funding for your city because it's all based on a seniority system, you're just putting your well being ahead of the well being of the people your city, which makes them a really good politician and a really bad leader. And as far as his team goes, I think it's sort of mixed. Right? Jesse Tisch is great. I think there are some other talented people there. I don't think it's bad that he sort of has a lot of young people around or ideologues around. But if you confuse governing with Instagram likes, that's a serious misunderstanding of the job. And I don't know that they can even differentiate between the means and the end. And if everyone is engaged in groupthink and no one pushes the mayor outside of his comfort zone, then you don't really get better results. And the other thing, again, is, for all the screaming about justice, he has incredibly few black and Latino appointees, deputy mayors or commissioners. And it's like, for a guy that's supposed to be a kind of a racial equality, it's a very white and Southeast Asian team. So either admit that that's not your thing and you don't really care about diversity and equality and inclusion, or have a administration that looks like it. So, all in all, to me, he's just sort of an extreme version of what we see from a lot of elected officials, which is he's great on politics, lacking intangible accomplishments, but it's only been six months and definitely lacking leadership that requires real political sacrifice. If he wants to be a truly great mayor, we already know he's a great politician. It means giving Tish the support she needs and the resources she needs, regardless of what his supporters want. It means not making operational decisions based on ideology. It means focusing on execution results and not just more slogans and spending. It means being serious about the budget, making truly hard on popular choices. It means taking jobs in the economy seriously, means actually prioritizing the education of kids rather than just paying lip service and placating the adults in the system. And it means seeing the job itself is more than movement, building an Instagram following. So can he do all this? I don't know if he has it in him, but as someone who truly loves the city, I hope he does.
- [35:11]
B
So let me ask you this one question. You mentioned the Knicks win. One of the reasons why Madani seems to have benefited from that is that he participated in it and gave good speech and sort of. He managed to kind of articulate.
- [35:25]
A
He's great at the pleasure of it,
- [35:27]
B
the joy of it. But how do you think? So he's good at that. He's good at sort of the good vibes. He's good at good vibes. But how do you think, based on what we know of him, he would do? Well, he would do in a crisis. So obviously, mayoralities are often defined by
- [35:44]
A
crisis, so I do think that those kinds of leadership skills can be very important. Right. So he might do really well in a crisis. I actually kind of would bet that he would do a lot better than, say, Bill de Blasio or Eric Adams. But the question is if it's a crisis where it's sort of a clear thing like a terrorist attack. Right. Then it brings everyone together. There's no political choices. If it's a crisis like a fiscal crisis or a police strike or you have to stare down the teacher's union or, you know, there is a really
- [36:21]
B
horrific crime of some sort.
- [36:23]
A
Yeah. Well, horrific crime though, again, usually then it's. He'll be fine. To excellent. In a crisis where there is a clear cut villain and a clear cut victim. Right. If it's a crisis where it's one that requires hard political choices and actions, I do not feel good about that at all.
- [36:45]
B
Okay.
- [36:47]
A
All right, so last thing is my 10 favorite books of 2026. Number one, watching over her by Jean Baptiste Andrea. It's a beautiful book about an Italian sculptor who goes through this transcendent religious experience at the end of a really tumultuous, exciting, crazy life during World War II. And it's just beautifully written, engaging characters, wonderful. Book two is the one that Hugo was telling me to look at Michael Idol. He's got a trilogy and the one that I was recommending was the Collaborators, but the Kimora and Hunt would also be, you know, on there too.
- [37:21]
B
And that's the new one. Yeah.
- [37:22]
A
Oh, I thought the Collaborators was better and I read it this year. But it's one of. He's one of the best spy novels I've come across.
- [37:28]
B
We should get him on the podcast. He's a great guy.
- [37:30]
A
Yeah. You know, and I thought it was just like one of the most intelligent writing of spy stuff that I'd seen. I think I even like, I forget what it was now, but he said something that sparked an entire substack once for me on a totally different topic, but it was just based on a line that he had in it. Third Everybody's Fly. A Life of Art, Music and Changing The Culture by Fab Five Freddy. Just incredible memoir of New York City in the 70s and 80s. Brought together the world to graffiti rap culture from the person who really kind of brought it all into the mainstream. And we're gonna do some sort of event with him at PNT Nate, where
- [38:03]
B
then Mark Roseo too, who. Who wrote it with him, who's a terrific writer.
- [38:08]
A
Yeah. So I don't know if it's set yet, but we'll keep you posted. But if you like New York City books, it's great.
- [38:13]
B
It's a fabulous book.
- [38:14]
A
Sure. It will be a Gotham Book Prize nominee next year. The Meaning of Life by Arthur Brooks. You know, Arthur certainly is someone whose overall worldview is something that has influenced and helped me quite a bit. I have found a lot of his work in the last couple of years to be lacking in that. It just feels like he's repeating the same shit over and over again and it's getting boring. But I thought what this book did well is even though there wasn't really new thinking in it, I thought it was a good mix of sort of science anecdotes, life lessons and learnings from research. He's. He might call himself a scientist, but I don't think he really is. He's more like. He's a business school professor and he summarizes other people's research, but he does it quite well. Rolling Stones by Bob Spitz. If you like music biographies, this was a great one. Just I can't think of many sort of bands for whom the entirety of their life would be sort of more interesting to read about and the music more significant. Right. So if you like the Stones, it's an incredible book. By the way, his Led Zeppelin biography was great too.
- [39:13]
B
Yeah, he's a pro. Mark Spitzer.
- [39:16]
A
Supposedly an incredible guitarist.
- [39:17]
B
Oh, really?
- [39:18]
A
Did you know that I heard him on Tyler Cowan's podcast and they were talking about it.
- [39:22]
B
Really?
- [39:22]
A
Yeah.
- [39:23]
B
I missed that episode.
- [39:25]
A
Check it out. Five by Lorna Bannister. Story that starts and ends on the London Tube track. Depicts the lives of five very different people that intertwine at times separated others. And it's a writing style. It's interesting, it tells much more than it shows, but it works really well. Usually that's not the best form of writing. I know you mentioned once that there's sort of a movement back towards that and she would be an argument for them. A violent masterpiece by Jordan Harper. Just a really good LA crime novel. A little less noir, more about kind of the worst of today's society and kind of the. The pursuit of sort of status and wealth and a zero sum worldview. Little macabre, but a really good book if you like that kind of stuff. I do. How to Rule the World by Theo Baker. It's the story of a young Stanford student who uncovered scientific fraud by the university president. Took him down through the school newspaper. But it's also a story about the culture that permeates Stanford and Silicon Valley. That's in some ways incredible, but in some ways really prioritizes all the wrong things in life. Rasputin Spins the Potomac by Ben Fountain. Comedic novel about Trump pursuing a third term. A pro wrestler who believes he's the original Rasputin and seems to have both magical powers and designs on the White House and a double agent. Reality TV producer. Com Staffer Funny, entertaining, insightful, a little scary, a little too on the nose sometimes, but overall I thought it was strong satire. And then Finally, Drayton and McKenzie by Alexander Starett. It's a coming of age novel of two Oxford graduates who are navigating the startup world. Friendship, relationships, family, ambition, money. But morally, just how to be a person in a in a complicated world. It takes a little while to get going, so I'm glad I didn't sort of ditch it, but by the time it was done I really was invested in the characters and really liked it.
- [41:10]
B
All right, there's your beach reading.
- [41:11]
A
All right, hopefully you guys like some of these and yeah, yeah, thanks and I'll talk to you later.
- [41:17]
B
Bye, Brad.
- [41:17]
A
Bye. Firewall is recorded at my bookstore, PNT Netware, located at 180 Orchard street on the lower east side of Manhattan. We'd love to hear from you with questions, feedbacks or idea for a guest. Just email me at Bradley Firewall Media or find me on LinkedIn. And to keep up with what's on my mind and my latest writing, please follow my new substack@bradleytus.substack.com thanks again for listening.