Whenever I run into political junkies on the streets, most of the static I receive-for my writings on these here blogs- usually come from, or for, things I say in my “Vines” column. I remember a couple years back when I first started doing these columns; I specifically told you all (between columns and threads) that it would be a mixture of political gossip, political history (first, second and third hand/lol), my insight/speculation/analysis, some inside info, some hard core facts/news, and some cleverly disguised political stuff for some of the insiders to figure out-much to their chagrin (I hoped/lol). I know that I haven’t disappointed you guys; and I base this conclusion on the feedback I get throughout all five boroughs. My blogging over the past three years has made me more popular now, than my almost 35 years of political and community activism in the five boroughs of New York City (and even beyond). Strange but true, and it demonstrates the power of media.

The story by Ben Smith about Rudy Giuliani's administration hiding the City's expenditues for his trysts with future wife #3 includes one point that puts a lie to part of the image Rudy is now peddling.

One of the obscure City agencies that paid for Rudt & Judi is the Loft Board.

Think about it.

Rudy claims to be a believer in law and order. He says he reformed New York City by governing as a fiscal conservative.

 But he kept a board whose function is to regulate the rent charged to people who live in housing that they illegally converted from commercial space to rental space.

In an editorial on health care costs, the Times describes much U.S. health care as unnecessary, ineffective, or wasteful. But it also asks “if citizens of an extremely wealthy nation like the United States want to spend more on health care and less on a third car, a new computer or a vacation home, what’s wrong with that?” There is nothing wrong with that, if they are spending their own money as individuals by their own choice. There is something wrong if they are forcing other citizens to pay more and accept less — in the case of the uninsured possibly even basic health care, to pay for it.

With Sheldon Silver laying low since Eliot Spitzer become Governor, I’ve spent the last year focused on how bad Joe Bruno and his ilk are for our state. But lately, Silver has set out to even the score, possibly thwarting plans for congestion pricing, certainly to blame for stuffing a well thought out and long-argued New York City garbage plan. With congestion pricing, at least, it could be argued that if Silver allowed a vote the plan would be voted down, that it hasn’t yet been endorsed by the New York City Council, and that other alternatives should be considered before a final decision is made. Silver being Silver I doubt it, but an argument could be made his is being reasonable and we are still moving toward a reasonable outcome. The garbage plan, however, was passed by the New York City Council in a show of considerable political courage, particularly by the Speaker, and is the result of 20 years of arguments, with one interest or another, one concern after another blocking all prior plans. Garbage, like traffic, is one of those things that can never be made perfect, but the city’s plan was certainly vetted. The argument that it would encumber a park is a red herring – the “park” is a similar facility closed not long ago, probably mapped as parkland precisely to avoid its use for anything like a recycling station. And unlike the congestion pricing plan, the city’s garbage plan would certainly have won in a free vote. The question is what to do now.

What I first recognized as a late-1980s-type housing price bubble, which I then learned to be part of a financial bubble, may in fact have been the last leg of a 25-year excess consumption boom.  Now, instead of a necessary (and for tomorrow’s home buyers beneficial) return to normal housing prices with some collateral damage, we may be in for something much worse.  Remember the 1970s?  Next year is probably going to hurt.  Some time ago I said that by the time the 2008 election rolled around no one would be talking about Iraq.  I also said that the Democrats would be lucky not to be in the White House, and would have been better off not having control of Congress.  That was based on falling housing prices alone.  That prediction I repeat, in spades.  Given that I will be affected by the fiscal fallout no matter how well I have personally insulated myself from the consequences of other people’s decisions, I’m starting to get worried.  Let’s look at the scenarios.

As long time readers of my posts know, local governments in the rest of New York State (the portion outside New York City) have been on a hiring binge for nearly two decades, despite ongoing complaints about property taxes and a stagnant population. The trend has been particularly pronounced in education, where with the exception of New York City districts have been told that the more money they spend, the more back door school aid (via STAR) they would receive. New York City, on the other hand, has been under pressure to cut costs and staffing for 30 years. While good economic years have seen increases and bad ones cuts, the long term trend in New York City public employment has been down. In general, when fiscal times have been tight, the rest of the state hasn’t cut back at all. Rather, it is New York City’s share of state fiscal resources that has been reduced. Elsewhere, no amount of money has ever been enough, as long as New York City taxpayers, future state taxpayers, or the city’s children could be sacrificed to pay. Well this could just be a blip, or the result of sampling error or people filling out forms incorrectly, but the New York State Department of Labor reports that in October 2007 local government employment in the rest of New York State was 3,400 lower than it had been a year earlier (see attached).