Below is an expanded version of my column in the New York Post on the Hochul/Mamdani special fee to be imposed on luxury property owners in New York. The new fee comes on top of property taxes and assessments. It is just one of the wealth taxes that Democrats are pushing in various states — and pushing out wealthy taxpayers and businesses.
Here is the column:
The hunt is on.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani used Tax Day to announce a new fee targeting wealthy people who still linger in the city after moving their primary residences to other states.
The tax, called pied-à-terre (or “foot on the ground”) is designed to hit people who still maintain high-value properties in the city. It is a remarkably moronic effort to ensure that wealthy people cut all ties with the city. However, Gov. Kathy Hochul has yielded to the far left and joined the effort.
Mamdani, a socialist who supports the “decommodification” of private property, is seeking major tax increases, including a 10% property tax, to fund his pledges for free buses, city-run stores, and other policies.
He will need it. Mamdani not only recently admitted that he cannot fulfill his pledge for free buses this year, but that he will only build the first of five promised city-run stores next year at the cost of $30 million — almost half of what he set aside for all five promised stores.
The new measure would add a fee to existing taxes for owners of high-value properties worth more than $5 million.
Mamdani declared the new fee part of “Happy Tax Day,” which will generate $500 million more to “help fund things like free child care, cleaner streets, and safer neighborhoods.”
He is also pushing Hochul to increase taxes on the 33,000 New Yorkers earning more than $1 million annually as well as those corporations that have not left the state. Other blue states from Washington to Virginia are moving toward similar millionaire taxes.
The move is consistent with other blue states seeing the same exodus of wealthy taxpayers and businesses due to the rising budgets and tax burdens. Rather than seeking to make their states magnets for investment, California and other states are pursuing retroactive wealth taxes and so-called “Teddy Bear laws” that refuse to recognize changes of residency.
New York has used its “Teddy Bear” regulations to declare that people who fled to other states are still residents subject to taxation because of the location of their sentimental attachments in New York (like a Teddy Bear) from pets to children.
In my new book, “Rage and the Republic,” I discuss these taxes and how they are the final stage of economic atrophy for states like New York. Politicians like Hochul cannot muster the courage to face bloated budgets, excessive union pension contracts, and runaway spending. In other words, it is too difficult to create a state that draws investment and residents like so many red states. Instead, they are chasing the remaining wealthy people who still maintain contacts with the state.
The result is a form of economic Darwinism in which the herd of wealthy taxpayers is thinned further by capturing the slowest or most nostalgic individuals.
The irony is that Hochul and Mamdani are working to cut the final ties of these former residents, convincing them that they are viewed as parasites to be pursued relentlessly for more taxes.
In Rage and the Republic, I discuss these efforts as a dangerous form of “economic factionalism,” a popular tactic historically used by demagogues to curry public favor by vilifying the wealthy.
Mamdani denounced those who “store their wealth in New York City real estate [and] reap the huge financial rewards” while “hurt[ing] working New Yorkers.”
This is evident in the renewed claims of figures such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), who used Tax Day to renew calls for her unconstitutional wealth tax.
Warren posted on X that “It’s time to make the ultra-wealthy pay their fair share. It’s time to pass a wealth tax.”
Socialist Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders also made the same claim. In a Guardian op-ed, Sanders cited shocking figures claiming that Elon Musk pays a tax rate of only 3.3% while Jeff Bezos pays less than 1%.
The claim comes from the dubious source ProPublica, which performs a statistical sleight of hand. In reality, the publication shows that figures like Jeff Bezos paid $973 million in taxes on income of $4.22 billion. That is a 23% tax burden, not less than 1%. Musk paid 30% with a $455 million tax bill.
The top 1% of taxpayers in this country paid roughly 40% of all taxes. The top 5% pays over 60% of taxes.
The Democrats are committed to economic factionalism as a strategy for the midterm elections. It is a major driver of the rage politics that many hope will allow them to regain power in November. It will come at a great cost to states like New York.
Hochul and Mamdani can hunt down the remaining wealthy taxpayers lingering in their state. In the end, it will not generate nearly as much revenue as it will cost as residents and businesses look elsewhere for positive living and business environments.
The best way to improve the standard of living in these states is to improve their economies and tax bases. Instead, blue states like California and New York are raising costs across the board, including through pushes for a $ 30-per-hour minimum wage. In California, the massive increases in the minimum wage have already resulted in substantial job losses and business closures.
It is unlikely that many wealthy individuals will stick around to experience what Mayor Mamdani calls “the warmth of collectivism.” Instead, it will be average New Yorkers who are burned by his “eat the rich” policies.
The mind set of socialists is revealed by their words. Mamdani used this phrase to justify higher taxes: “help fund things like free child care, cleaner streets, and safer neighborhoods.” Two of these things are not dependent on money. Clean streets and safe neighborhoods are the result of the resolve of political leaders to vigorously enforce local laws. There is no alternative to courage in political leaders. It reminds me of the statements from the Biden administration that they could not enforce immigration laws unless Congress gave them additional funding. Oddly enough, when administrations changed, it turned out that it was easy to enforce immigration laws on the current budget.
Well, here is another example of failed Democrat policies leading to the departure of billion dollar companies, Another billion-dollar company is leaving California
“In a news release, the building giant cited a more “business-friendly operating environment” in Arizona and that the departure from California would “lower the company’s cost structure over time.”
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/kb-home-leaving-california-22204479.php
Is anyone really surprised?
– TAX the RICH-POLITICIANS ! –
What Hochul and Mamdani would rather say is, “Kill all the Rich and Take all their Wealth.” Because they want all the money… all the wealth owned by the rich, the middle class, the poor. They will never stop because their lust for power and wealth to feed their unions and metastasizing bureaucracies never ever will be satisfied. They are cancers and parasites on the body politic, nothing more. They never solve a single problem. They only make our problems more intractable. They destroy everything they touch.
The amount of land development that is occurring along the corridor in which I live here in Florida is significant. The farmland is giving away to housing subdivisions and they don’t start to build until the purchase is closed. These are million dollar properties hence there is no secret to the economic standing of the purchases. It is clear that other people‘s money is coming to Florida and the elected officials of the jurisdictions in which it is believe they are entitled to it had best start thinking twice.
High-wealth migration has concentrated risk in coastal areas, leading to commercial insurance rates in high-risk areas seeing double-digit percentage increases. That means even more high home insurance rates for everyone else. That’s pricing out lower income folks with higher property taxes and insurance.
Net migration into Florida saw a sharp decline by late 2025, with some data indicating a drop to under 25,000 net new residents for the year as housing and insurance costs reshaped relocation trends.
Also Florida is losing valuable land to more development and most of those include subdivisions that sit empty because too many people can’t afford to buy overpriced homes and home insurance,.
X –
You know how to use ChatGPT! Congratulations!
Do you know what sources ChatGPT used to create this post?
These wealthy New york voters for the most part voted for Mandami and Hochul. Let them reef with they so
And do recall, this was Hochul just a month ago, Desperate Hochul begs wealthy New Yorkers to come back — as Mamdani pressures her to hike their taxes
“Maybe the first step should be to go down to Palm Beach and see who we can bring back home because our tax base has been eroded,” the Democratic governor said at a forum hosted by Politico last week.
“I have to look at the fact that we are in competition with other states who have less of a tax burden on their corporations and their individuals,” she said.
https://nypost.com/2026/03/18/us-news/kathy-hochul-begs-wealthy-new-yorkers-to-come-back-as-mamdani-pressures-her-to-hike-their-taxes/
Oops! She said the quiet part, the part she was not supposed to say in public, out loud!
Here is a novel idea, Since the unions constantly say they cannot afford the cost of living, yet continually push for and get unrealistic increases, how about reducing the cost of unions in the government to that of the average of the residents. Then if all the poor, middle class and upper income add up to $75k a year with benefits, the union gets paid the same amount. Equal pay and taxes for everyone. Isn’t that the Communist way? Or is it only to the benefit of the politicians to say make the rich pay more while they are rich also?
How about abolishing the right of public workers to form unions? Only that act will solve the problem.
Turley characterizes the tax as “moronic,” yet New York is one of the few global hubs that doesn’t already have one. Cities like London, Paris, and Vancouver use similar fees to ensure that owners of high-value, non-primary residences contribute to the city’s upkeep. If someone owns a $5 million secondary home in Manhattan, they are utilizing the city’s police, fire services, and infrastructure; this tax simply ensures they pay for that “foot on the ground” rather than leaving the burden entirely to full-time residents.
For those ultra-wealthy this is just part of being…ultra-wealthy. Keep in mind that they are still making more and more money every year. They are not suffering from high costs.
The issue is NYC, not the world. As for the others global cities you mention … you lie. No they do not have “similar fees”. Cite the source(s). Liar.
Nope.
Paris, France: The city applies a 60% surcharge on the standard residence tax (taxe d’habitation) for secondary properties. As of 2026, this is a central part of Paris’s strategy to fund urban infrastructure.
London, UK: Under the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023, London and many other English councils began charging a 100% premium (effectively doubling the council tax) on second homes as of April 1, 2025.
Vancouver, Canada: The city currently levies an Empty Homes Tax (EHT) of 3% of the assessed value on residential properties that are not a primary residence. This is in addition to the British Columbia Speculation and Vacancy Tax, which is rising to 3% for foreign owners in 2026.
Toronto, Canada: Toronto increased its Vacant Home Tax to 3% of the property’s assessed value starting in the 2024 tax year, which remains in effect through 2026.
Other Regions: Wales allows councils to charge premiums as high as 300%, while Scotland recently granted local authorities the power to raise second-home premiums by uncapped amounts, reaching as high as 500% in some areas.
There are those who believe that “Britain, France and other western countries are dangerously close to collapsing into violent civil conflict characterised by ‘feral cities’ where authorities can no longer maintain rule of law, a military expert has warned.” These cities are “losing the ability to peacefully manage multicultural societies” that are ‘terminally fractured by ethnic identity politics’ and increasingly gripped by riots, terrorism and unrest.” https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/feral-cities-western-countries-face-civil-war-within-five-years-military-expert-warns/news-story/ce419aaaa12d7a9961727e8f6ad7b7c4
I heard on the news this morning that Starmer was fighting for political survival. Are you reading with comprehension, or selective source?
Sure, there are always people who believe lots of things like worst case scenarios, mostly conspiracy theory nuts.
The Starmer issue has nothing to do with the city. European cities do face an issue with sustaining fuel and energy because of Trump’s stupidity. Not because they are ‘collapsing’ on their own. Ironically Republicans here at home are starting to fight for their political survival in the shadow of Trump’s ineptitude and increasing senility issues. It’s amusing how much the U.S. media under Trump’s threats is not telling the whole truth about what is really going on with Iran and Trump’s failing economic policies.
your opinion is no more valid than the “people who believe lots of things like worst case scenarios, mostly conspiracy theory nuts.” In fact, it is less valid, because “they” are published articles in international publications, while you take out your contrariness on a simple blog . ha ha ha ha
“London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s Dismal Record: Excuses, Failures, and the Decline of a Global City”
https://damienduncan.substack.com/p/london-mayor-sadiq-khans-record-excuses
“Vancouver falls down the list of top cities in the world for 2025”
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-top-cities-worldwide
“Paris is panicking as 10,000 Parisians are abandoning the city each year.” Fortune Magazine
“The trend is confirmed, Paris is losing more residents.” LeBonBon Magazine
“According to INSEE data, the Parisian population has fallen from 2,24 million inhabitants in 2012 to 2,10 million in 2023, marking a loss of 138 inhabitants in just ten years. This depopulation can be explained by several factors: the exorbitant cost of living, a sharply rising property tax (+000% since 50), and the reduction in the economic attractiveness of the capital. The middle classes, particularly impacted by the increase in tax burdens and rents, are leaving Paris in search of more affordable living conditions on the outskirts.
“Financially, the situation is just as alarming. The city’s debt has exploded, rising from 4 billion euros in 2014 to more than 9 billion in 2024, and could reach 10 billion in 2026 according to forecasts. A dizzying increase that results in an annual cost of 225 million euros in interest.” (“Anne Hidalgo’s report in Paris: thousands fewer inhabitants and billions of euros more debt”)
More reading comprehension needed here, X.
That is what the real estate property tax is doing. You fool.
True, BUT…..they also charge an extra fee for those who don’t live in those properties full time. Especially the ultra-wealthy. It’s literally not a burden on them. The exclusivity of their properties and the fact that they don’t live there full time while depending on the infrastructure that everyone else pays for makes it fair they pay extra for keeping an empty apartment or home.
As I pointed out every major city around the world does this. It has been done for decades. The ultra-wealthy still choose to live in those places despite the extra fees because they can afford it without issues. Keep in mind that these ultra-wealthy ‘residents’ are not on a fixed income. They live on growing profits and more income every year thanks to generous tax cuts and other goodies only the ultra-wealthy have access to.
Pardon if this is repetitive, but my reply is missing.
The question is whether wealth is already leaving NYC or not. Then what happens with this new tax that will add a small fraction to NYC’s deficit, but can lead to a larger additive outflow of capital wealth over the years? I don’t think we can make a final decision yet because the efficacy of this policy remains indeterminate; the outcome hinges on whether international capital inflows can effectively offset the domestic exodus.
If NYC is right, it adds a bit of capital wealth to pay for free buses and a grocery store that will cost the city money. If NYC is wrong, the city risks fiscal destabilization; the reliance on a shrinking pool of high-income earners to fund structural deficits creates extreme risk. Americans no longer have to live near the economic center of capital wealth.
LMAO. And look how successful those oligarch cities are doing relative to the comparable US Blue cess pits. They are all running out of “other peoples’ money”. London, Paris, Vancouver, New York, LA, Seattle, San Francisco, Washington DC, Baltimore, . . . This is a wonderful multi-ring circus of farcical clowns that deserve what they are getting — and a sad show to watch. I just wish it wasn’t my money they were filling the those outhouses with. King Troll X – you outdid yourself on this one.
HumorAtBEst, nope.
The data for 2026 shows that these cities are not “failing,” but are reinforcing their status as global financial anchors:
New York City remains the wealthiest city in the world in 2026, housing approximately 349,500 millionaires and leading globally with 129 billionaires.
London continues to be Europe’s preeminent wealth hub, hosting 227,000 millionaires and 97 billionaires despite recent economic shifts.
Paris and Vancouver also remain in the global top 40 for millionaire concentration, with Paris hosting 165,000 millionaires as of early 2026.
London/UK: In January 2026, the public sector recorded a £30.4 billion surplus, the largest monthly surplus since records began in 1993. This was driven by a record £46.4 billion in self-assessed income and capital gains tax receipts from high earners.
Paris/France: While still managing a deficit, France narrowed its budget gap more than expected to 5.1% in 2025 and passed a 2026 budget aimed at further reduction to 5% through targeted business taxes rather than broad residential hikes.
Major cities are literally wealth generators. That’s why the ultra-wealthy, have homes there. Where they make their growing profits every year.
The question is whether wealth is already leaving NYC or not. Then what happens with this new tax that will add a small fraction to NYC’s deficit, but can lead to a larger additive outflow of capital wealth over the years? I don’t think we can make a final decision yet because the efficacy of this policy remains indeterminate; the outcome hinges on whether international capital inflows can effectively offset the domestic exodus.
If NYC is right, it adds a bit of capital wealth to pay for free buses and a grocery store that will cost the city money. If NYC is wrong, the city risks fiscal destabilization; the reliance on a shrinking pool of high-income earners to fund structural deficits creates extreme risk. Americans no longer have to live near the economic center of capital wealth.
This would an additional tax to the already existing property tax. Through the property tax, the non-resident pied-a-terre owner contributes to the city’s upkeep, etc. in the same manner as resident home owners. The new tax only applies to non-resident owners of property valued at all least $5MM and, thus, discriminates between resident and non-resident home owners. There is no justification for such an additional tax other than ‘we need the money and you have it’. Essentially, this is the street robber’s argument.
DoubleDutch, you forget, living in those cities is NOT a right. It’s a privilege. The privilege of having the apartment with the best views, access to world financial markets, connections, business, and prestige all are privileges that the ultra wealthy have no problem paying a premium for maintaining.
Do you think those same people who spend $12,000 on a designer trash can, millions on furniture, art, and literally bragging rights to the best spot on a city care if they. Pay extra for it? No. The only people griping are the apologists who have no idea what they are defending.
Do wealthy people whose extra apartments create maintenance problems have to live in NYC? No! Renting might be more pragmatic, and the sale might provide additional capital to invest in more lucrative things without the risk.
If capital flight occurs, they can lose millions. I worry about that and am always considering whether I should sell my largely unoccupied co-op in Manhattan and diversify elsewhere. My broader investments have increased more than the apartment.
X, George, you once again miss the point, that is the issue. The property owners of 5 million dollar second homes in NY ALREADY pay property taxes on said properties and property taxes are assessed by value on the property. So the home owner of a 5 million dollar place pays more than the owners of $300,000 properties. What this new tax wants to do is make the person owning the 5 million place pay a higher rate by % than the people that own 4 million dollar places. What makes the one guy the enemy and the other just another homeowner?
Florida will reap the benefits of these wealthy people moving and for those, Like X, George, who claim that “oh well, another rich guy will just buy the house”, they forget that the owner of the 5 million dollar place also spends a lot of money in the area where he lives and he will take that money with them when they leave.
PS. Hey X, why can’t you agree with Turley just once? I will admit that you are polite, you (try to) make an argument and you are not Anonymous, but just once try to say that Turley, or Republicans, are right about something. It will add to the little credibility you have.
Hullbobby, you’re missing the point.
These are properties that are barely used. They are there as. A convenience for the ultra-wealthy. Just for bragging rights of having a nice apartment or home in NYC. Every other world city has these kinds of extra fees.
They are not going to go broke or “flee” because it’s an extra expense they can easily afford. Their wealth grows every year. Their income is not fixed.
Florida may be an attractive place for the ultra wealthy because of the low taxes, BUT that doesn’t mean it’s cheap either. Home insurance, even for ultra expensive properties is sky high in Florida due to the increasing hurricane risk. Property taxes are also increasing in Florida to compensate for the lack of income taxes. More wealthy people move in means more multi-million dollar homes that require more infrastructure to support and that means more property tax increases for the rest of the population effectively pricing out the lower income residents. Just like New York City.
Hullbobby, I have agreed with Turley before, when he posts something that I agree with and that is rare. Until he does then you will know. But that’s when everyone else ends up disagreeing with Turley and that’s just fine.
How about you? When have you agreed with Democrats or any liberal point of view? I’m sure there have been rare occasions when that has happened.
X, you missed it again. The owners ALREADY pay a ton of property tax for the privilege of living or having a second home in the city. You keep saying that they get services etc but you keep IGNORING the fact that they ALREADY pay property taxes. Not to mention that the owners of second homes don’t have children in the school system, the most expensive line item in any city’s budget. They don’t use as much water, they don’t use as much garbage services. They don’t use the roads as much. They don’t need police as much. But they pay high property taxes ALREADY.
And yes, I have agreed with Democrats and disagreed with Republicans when needed. When Trump attacked Rob Reiner after he was killed I was mad at him. When the Republicans went to far with some abortion limits I complained. When conservatives attack Israel I go at them pretty hard. But I have never seen you disagree with a Schumer or a Biden or any Democrat. Was Biden, Mayorkas and the Dems wrong to open the border? Now you will say they didn’t open it yada yada and we need comprehensive yada yada etc etc. Was no bail wrong when the guy freed kills a woman? You will yada yada it to death.
Your credibility is zero.
Hullbobby, no, you are still missing the point. They pay the same property taxes like everyone else according to the value of their property. BUT, since they also only live on those properties part time or rarely they are being charged an extra fee because the city can do that. Nobody has a right to live in NYC or anywhere else. It’s a privilege and to live there when you’re using the services that support the city while not living there they can asses an extra fee. The ultra rich can afford it. They have no problem paying for the privilege of having a home or apartment in the city and the most sought after views.
Remember, it’s a privilege, not a right and the ultra-wealthy will always pay more for the privilege of maintaining those homes because it’s what reinforces their status as ‘different’ than the rest of us. As a city NYC can charge an extra fee to those people just like any other major city in the world. They will not suffer because of the extra cost, especially when they are making more and more money every year.
Hullbobby, enemy? Why would they be an ‘enemy’? If that’s how you look at it you’re clearly seeing it all wrong.
They are there because that’s where they make their money. It’s where they all make their untold billions and millions in profits every year. Bonuses and tax breaks from other places keeps making them richer and richer.
The owner of a $300,000 home is not going to be making a grossly over the top profit or wealth every year compared to a billionaire who pays for their multimillion dollar properties with a mortgage. Some may many just don’t. The wealth gap between a homeowner with a $300,000 home and a part-time homeowner with a $5 million or more home or apartment is massive. The ultra wealthy are not being hurt by these extra fees. It’s pocket change to them or at least just the normal cost of maintaining their status and privileges to live in NYC in the most desirable properties in the world. Those bragging rights are not cheap and many gladly pay for the xtra expense just to be able to claim they have a place in NYC. Keep in mind these are the same kind of people who buy multi-million dollar yachts only to sell it two years later and get a bigger one because their “buddy” bought a nicer and bigger one than theirs.
These extra fees are literally nothing to them except to people like Turley and those who have the mentality of “those poor billionaires are getting charged too much.” Please, they could care less. Only the billionaire cheapskates like Trump like to complain and threaten to leave because it puts a tiny dent on their wealth for the privilege of living in a prestigious city like NYC or London or Paris.
“If someone owns a $5 million secondary home in Manhattan, they are utilizing the city’s police, fire services, and infrastructure; this tax simply ensures they pay for that…”
They pay property taxes on these homes already, just like the full-time residents. They ARE paying for the services.
Re: “they are utilizing the city’s police, fire services, and infrastructure; this tax simply ensures they pay for that “foot on the ground” Rubbish!! This is a ‘From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” scenario The bourgeoisie vs the proletariat ,at the head of which, in NYC, is the typical, well-heeled Islamo-Communist of the ‘Sanders School’ whose philosophy is ‘Collectivism is for YOU, not for Me!, and has sold his ‘free stuff’ constituency on that. Those ultra-wealthy who desire to continue to feed that insatiable beast as a feel good, virtue-signaling, non-deductible charitable contribution are welcome to do so. Were it me, I’d take myself, my business interests, my belongings and my real estate holdings and park my Phantom Drophead Coupe on my circular driveway, in front of my front door, in a galaxy, far, far, away.
This is just outright theft.
Short Tern Gain with Long Term Pain – Sums it up nicely for NYC!!! By 2030 that place will be a 1984 Poster Child.
It should be called The Laugher’s Curve
Once you reach a certain level taxing the rich, they laugh and say, “Bye-Bye”.
Democrats are fascists set on destroying western society
End all federal aid and outlaw public unions
Destroy them
Reminder Germany voted for Hitler
How are the drugs this morning?
Voting democrats means hate America. That is clear
I have to say these people who raise or pitch these taxes are economic and historical illiterates because they seem oblivious to the fact that all these types of taxes keep being tried elsewhere and fail by reducing the incomes of the states and cities that use them and then they get revoked by the survivors. Wealth taxes have failed in Europe and been revoked because those subject to them just move. Inordinate raises of the minimum wage was predicted to cause layoffs in the cities that have used them and then the layoffs happen and suddenly you order food at a kiosk and it’s made by a machine and you see no human.
About the only point of discussion left is whether you tip the machine.
Actually these politicians are just lazy and just won’t invest in the footwork, research, citizen input about ways to get things done more efficiently or with new ideas. Or sometimes recognize that a program was a failure and should be stopped. Or maybe really push to see where and to whom the money goes. After seeing the seeming billions of dollars lost to corruption in several states and cities, it would seem to be the first place to look for money wasted.
Florida does not succeed just because their taxes are low. You have a governor who gets things done. Before Desantis, Jeb Bush was also a highly effective governor. Abbot in Texas is also effective and there have been democratic governors in the past who were effective as well as mayors. Those are the leaders. Raising taxes is easy, accomplishing something beneficial to a society is hard work, and few people or leaders want to put in the effort.
It can be like building a company. You have to offer something better, improve efficiency , expand an expertise, maybe make a product better but cheaper. Hard work. Sometimes the option to raise the price is not there so you have to do better in some other way. You gotta look for those options and some may fail but your company fails if you don’t do the work, same for a city or state.
Is there a point in there? Not one mention of NYC.
GEB,
Well said. It is as if they have never studied history or economics.
Well, all we have to do is sit back and watch if this will be a success or failure. Looking at other states whom have tried similar policies, I am betting on the latter.
The good professor doesn’t seem to care that such obvious typos in his columns diminish the credibility of his underlying points. Or that the constant references to his new book do the same.
Sad. Wise up Professor.
Typo = lack of Credibility? Seriously/ And you have credibility considering your poorly punctuated comment?
W_T_F is it with you geriatrics? You waste an entire day here shitting on each other out or boredom target b_s and now s-h-i-t on Turley for typos? Seriously?
What’s wrong with you little snot nosed pusscake soy boys? Show some respect for seasoned men of accomplishment.
You an English major
Values Style over Substance?
Wiseoldlawyer, I think I agree with you about 95% of the time but you are off the mark with this comment. Sure the typos get caught in my throat and yes, Turley does hype his book a lot, but that is a tiny price to pay for this great site that has no ads, isn’t paywalled and allows comments. It is the Anonymous creeps that harm the site, not a few typos and a daily book hype.
Come on man, lighten up, you are better than this.
Better? Ha! what nonsense. You useless old creatures contribute nothing to society. Get out of the way or else…
Typos and book references: “. . . diminish the credibility . . .”
Only to ingrates.
In defense of Professor Turley, it is his site and he can do what he wants. Typo’s are a result of two things in my opinion, typing fast, thinking ahead, fat fingers and a rush to get things out as well as a possible dyslexia. I miss type and miss think all the time as to most of the other posters on this site. However instead of critiquing his typo’s and book references, how about critiquing and add positive or negative comments about the post. I am surprised. Otherwise you join the group of anonymous, X and the other anti what ever and post and paste.
ps. I accidentally pressed on like trying to get to reply.
Hochul’s name is spelled wrong in the title.
I thought it referred to the Houtis, which would be adequate as Hochul and Mamdani also behave like pirates.
You’re correct, the actual spelling is Wicked Witch of the East.
I almost lost at Wordle. NYT is doing it in French.
The anonymous economic illiterates that populate these comments will be overjoyed today.
That comment exposes your economic illiteracy.
I think that Mamdani is an economics’ illiterate and therefore completely unqualified to govern, but Hochul is a political opportunist, who those New Yorkers that don’t bother to vote well deserve. New York and California are now bankrupt intellectually as,well as financially. New York City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco will now revert to the status of “formerly great places to live and work.”
As someone from upstate NY, no matter if every person north of Albany voted republican, we could not produce enough votes to counter the mass of morons down state. We are, virtually, held prisoner to that seething mass of ideologues and parasites.
Please correct the statistic given
“ The top 1% of taxpayers in this country paid roughly 40% of all taxes. The top 5% pays over 40% of taxes”
Correct. The top 5% pays around 60%. From another source:
“…
Here are the receipts.
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐨𝐩 𝟏% — “𝐍𝐨𝐭 𝐏𝐚𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐅𝐚𝐢𝐫 𝐒𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞”
In tax year 2022, the top 1% of American earners paid 𝟒𝟎.𝟒% 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐟𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐱𝐞𝐬 (Tax Foundation, IRS Statistics of Income, 2025).
What share of the nation’s income did they earn? 𝟐𝟐.𝟒% (IRS SOI, 2022).
Read that again. They earned 22% of the income. They paid 40% of the tax. That ratio — paying nearly 𝐝𝐨𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐞 your share — is the textbook definition of a progressive tax system. It is the opposite of a regressive one.
The entry point to the top 1%? $𝟔𝟔𝟑,𝟏𝟔𝟒 in Adjusted Gross Income (IRS, Tax Year 2022). That is dentists. Specialist physicians. Small business owners. Two-income coastal professionals. Not yachts. Not billionaires. Real people who already bleed a quarter of every dollar to Washington.
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐨𝐩 𝟓%, 𝟏𝟎%, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝟐𝟓% — 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐞𝐬
The top 5% of earners (AGI above $261,591) paid 𝟔𝟏.𝟎% of all federal income taxes (Tax Foundation, 2025).
The top 10% (AGI above $178,611) paid 𝟕𝟐.𝟎% of all federal income taxes (Tax Foundation, 2025).
The top 25% (AGI above $104,225) paid 𝟖𝟕.𝟐% of all federal income taxes (Tax Foundation, 2025).
The top 50% (AGI above $50,339) paid 𝟗𝟕% of all federal income taxes (Tax Foundation, 2025). …”
Whig98
For reasons unknown to me the automated system marked the above comment as spam. I have restored it. The article was changed reflect the 60% instead of 40% error that you mentioned.
You’re right. It should be 60% by the top 5.
Another economic illiterate raises his ignorant head for recognition.
Facts are stubborn things
I defended this site and it’s typos above, but that sentence made no sense to me too.
Well, hullbobby, I agree with your comments about 95% of the time too, but the Professor is a lawyer and lawyers need to pay attention to typos, grammar and usage more than other folks. In my profession, words and language matter a lot. I can’t begin to tell you how often I have seen attorneys humiliated by Judges for sloppy writing, even if their substance was valid. I recall one federal judge in New Jersey holding my opponent’s brief over a trash can with two fingers, after noting that it was full of such errors, and saying for the record: “I will give Mr. X’s brief all the consideration it deserves” before dropping the brief into the trash.
While you are defending typos, let me join you. The “it’s” in your comment should be “its”.
I will agree that writing on the internet like this does not require the care and precision needed for a court brief, and I am also guilty of sloppy grammar and punctuation from time to time because I am often in a hurry. But the author/sponsor of this blog should be held to a higher standard.
And thank you for the compliment (I think).
It’s no sense to he, too. Hee hee.