Tag: free stuff

New York City Losing Millions to Fare Skippers as People Embrace Zohran Mamdani’s Promise of ‘FREE’ Buses

During the mayoral race, communist Zohran Mamdani made the promise of ‘free’ buses a central part of his campaign. He hasn’t delivered on this promise yet, but that hasn’t stopped New Yorkers from pretending that he did and skipping bus fares.

The lost revenue is costing the city millions, which could put a damper on the mayor’s many other promises of free stuff.

It’s just the sort of basic economics that people on the left refuse to understand.

FOX News reports:

New Yorkers take Zohran Mamdani free bus promise literally as MTA loses millions in skipped fares

Political promises of “free buses” in New York City are contributing to a spike in fare evasion that is costing the city’s mass transit system millions of dollars, transit officials warn.

In July, Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Chairman Janno Lieber blamed political rhetoric for fueling fare evasion, though he never mentioned Mayor Zohran Mamdani by name.

“There’s a trend that broke out,” Lieber told reporters following a meeting of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board, according to the New York Post. “With malice towards none, I say all of the talk of free buses, it has an impact.”

The MTA reported that paid bus ridership fell nearly 8% in June compared to the same month last year. During Mamdani’s first six months in office, bus fare revenue fell by $31 million compared to the first half of 2025. Agency estimates show nearly half of bus riders now skip the $3 fare.

Mamdani made the slogan “fast and free buses” a major part of his 2025 mayoral campaign. However, the MTA is controlled by Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul and the state, rather than City Hall. While the mayor and Hochul unveiled plans on July 8 to focus instead on speeding up bus routes, experts and union leaders say the “free bus” rhetoric has already contributed to fare evasion.

Who could have predicted this, besides every conservative in the country?

Keep reading

Socialism Simplified: A System Where Government Uses Your Money To Solve Everyone Else’s Problems

They are coming for your money, and they have a ton of momentum right now. Democratic Socialists are winning election after election by promising free stuff, but of course free stuff is never actually free. Somewhere along the way, someone has to pay for it. If you find yourself protectively reaching for your wallet as you read this, I don’t blame you one bit. Socialism is a system where the government uses your money to solve everyone else’s problems. Unfortunately, it is also a system that is becoming increasingly popular among our young adults.

In a previous article, I noted that a poll that was taken in 2025 found that a whopping 62 percent of U.S. adults under the age of 30 now have a positive view of socialism.

That should chill you to the core.

Meanwhile, Americans view capitalism less favorably than they once did…

  • Fewer than half of Americans say capitalism is working even “somewhat” well — down from 60% about a decade ago, according to a June Wall Street Journal-NORC poll.
  • 61% of Americans said they were bothered “a lot” by the feeling that the wealthy don’t pay their fair share in taxes, per a Pew Research Center poll in January. That included 41% of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents.
  • The same poll showed another 60% overall — and 42% of Republican-inclined voters — said the same about some corporations paying their fair share.
  • And views of big business went from 19 points positive in 2012 (58%-39%) to 25 points negative last year (37%-62%), according to the Gallup data.

This is crazy.

So why is this happening?

Well, the truth is that a large portion of the population is very frustrated with the economy.

The rising cost of living has been absolutely eviscerating the middle class, and many young adults consider homeownership to be completely out of reach because home prices are so absurdly high.

When someone comes along and starts promising all sorts of free stuff in this very harsh economic environment, it can be very seductive.

But if the Democratic Socialists of America were actually able to implement their entire agenda on the federal level, it would more than triple federal spending…

The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) propose new spending that could more than triple federal outlays. They propose the government pay for health care, housing, higher education, and electricity. Jobs are government-guaranteed, retirement benefits are expanded, paid family leave is universal, fossil fuels are eliminated, and reparations are paid.

The DSA platform claims that the bill for all this will be sent to “the richest individuals and corporations.” Tally up that bill, and it ballparks between $71 trillion and $212 trillion in new spending over the next decade. Confiscating every dollar of high-end wealth and corporate profits would cover only a fraction of those costs. The DSA agenda necessitates high taxes on middle-class Americans.

If you took every penny from every billionaire in America, that would only account for 8.4 trillion dollars.

So where is the rest of the money going to come from?

Keep reading

NANNY STATE: Zohran Mamdani Launching City Government Babysitting Service so Parents Can Have a Date Night

Conservatives used to joke that the left was trying to turn the government into a nanny state. Now, Zohran Mamdani is taking it literally.

The New York City mayor is launching a service where people in the city can drop their kids off at the park to be looked after by government officials while the parents can have a date night. What could possibly go wrong?

Would you be comfortable dropping your kids off at a New York City park and then going out to dinner?

ABC News in New York reports:

Date night, anyone? NYC launching free babysitting program for parents

New York City is giving parents a chance for a night off through a new pilot program that will provide free child care for hundreds of families next month.

Mayor Mamdani announced the launch of “Parents’ Night Out,” a city-sponsored program that will offer free babysitting for up to 500 children on Aug. 16 from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Registration opens at 8 a.m. Monday and will be available on a first-come, first-served basis.

“Every parent knows that a few hours to yourself can feel like a luxury,” said Mayor Mamdani in prepared remarks. “It shouldn’t be. That’s why we’re launching New York City’s first-ever Parents’ Night Out, so that parents can get a little time on their own to catch a movie, run errands or go on a date without worrying about who will take care of the kids – or how much it will cost.”

The program is open to families with children ages 6 to 13 and will provide free child care at designated city recreation centers.

City officials say the initiative is designed to give parents and caregivers a break while children participate in supervised activities.

Keep reading

SURPRISE! Zohran Mamdani’s Universal ‘Free’ Childcare Program Projected to Cost Billions More Than Planned

Zohran Mamdani’s universal and ‘free’ childcare program in New York City is now being projected to cost billions more than originally planned.

Who could have predicted such a thing?

Only a leftist could devise a government-run program that costs billions of tax dollars and have the nerve to call it free. It’s a concept that is completely lost on the media.

In this case, no one should be surprised that the price tag keeps going up.

The New York Post reports:

Mamdani’s universal childcare plan will cost taxpayers billions more than planned as costs balloon: report

Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s universal childcare plan will cost 50% more than he advertised, according to a new study.

The proposed program is estimated to cost a whopping $9 billion annually, approximately with an average cost per child roughly $27,000, according to the report from the Center for New York City Affairs, a nonpartisan research organization affiliated with the New School.

“An estimated $8.7 to $9.3 billion would be needed annually to fund universal child care in New York City,” the report, which was released on Monday, states.

That’s $3 billion more than the mayor previously said his ambitious universal free childcare program would cost.

Hizzoner promised on the campaign trail that his plan to make childcare free for children from 6 weeks old to five years old regardless of family income would cost about $6 billion per year and be paid for by taxing the state’s wealthiest earners.

The $3 billion gap identified in the study was largely tied to teacher pay, with the Center for NYC Affairs estimating some 23,000 new childcare workers will need to be hired, mainly for infants and children under three years old.

Keep reading

Scamdani and the Truth About City-Owned Grocery Stores

Some of my earliest memories are from a grocery store.

My mother, and later her sister, worked at a locally owned Key Market running the deli department. Baked goods, hot meals, sliced meats and fresh salads, and the best donuts you ever tasted made from scratch every day — it was a kid’s paradise. She would sometimes take me to work on Saturdays, and I’d help, doing everything but slicing the meat (age-restricted because it’s dangerous). It was fun for me, and I learned things I would not have learned watching cartoons.

Later, just before I married and became a military wife, I worked at my local Kroger regional office supporting loyalty card and marketing issues for, gosh, I guess it was about 200 stores. I learned a lot about the grocery business.

All this is to say: I know the difference between grocery economics and political theater.

Scamdani’s ever-evolving store plans

Zohran Mamdani, New York’s newest Hizzoner, ran largely on a pledge to create city-owned grocery stores, and today he’s working to fulfill that promise. Sort of. The idea was to decrease prices for consumers by removing the “gouging” profit model.

Some of his campaign promises included:

  • “Grocery prices are out of control. The cost of eggs and milk has skyrocketed. Some stores are even using dynamic pricing, jacking up the cost over the course of the day depending on what they can get away with. It doesn’t need to be this way. I’m Zohran Mamdani, and as mayor, I will create a network of city-owned grocery stores. It’s like a public option for produce. We will redirect city funds from corporate supermarkets to city-owned grocery stores, whose mission is lower prices, not price gouging.”
  • “I’m Zohran Mamdani, and as mayor, I will create a network of city-owned grocery stores. It’s like a public option for produce.”
  • “We will redirect city funds from corporate supermarkets to city-owned grocery stores, whose mission is lower prices, not price gouging.” (This one is especially rich, as you’ll see.)
  • “Last month, we announced that we would fulfill a campaign promise: that we would lower prices by creating a network of city-owned grocery stores, one in each borough. In these stores, prices will be cheaper.”

Sounds great. So last month, he announced the reality: a limited core basket including produce, meat, seafood, milk, bread, yogurt, and a few other things to be priced 30% below “typical retail,” whatever that really means, in city-owned and subsidized stores run by private for-profit operators. Operators are entitled to price everything outside the core basket at whatever they like. The discounted “basket” will be subsidized by the city. The city covers capital, rent, and property tax. And users, as announced today, will be required to prove residency with a “library card” style identification.

As Darth Vader said, the deal has been altered. Pray he does not alter it further.

Keep reading

Canada: The Illusion Of Free Healthcare

With the rise in popularity of the Democratic Socialist movement in the United States, one of the promises made to voters is “free healthcare.” Advocates frame healthcare as a human right, pointing north to Canada as the example of universal coverage.

The slogan is simple, powerful, and politically effective: Canadians enjoy free healthcare. The belief that Canadian healthcare is free stems from the fact that Canadians do not pay at the point of service. Yet the question remains: Is it truly free, and what does “free” actually mean?

Anyone applying basic logic and common sense quickly realizes that a system as complex as healthcare, involving doctors, nurses, hospitals, equipment, pharmaceuticals, and administrators, cannot exist without someone paying for it. The real question is not whether money is paid, but how it is collected, who controls it, and how the system functions behind the scenes.

Canada’s healthcare system is often described as universal, equitable, and accessible. But beneath the surface lies a prepaid tax‑funded model controlled almost entirely by government. The mechanics of this system are not widely understood by the average Canadian consumer, largely because the costs are hidden within layers of taxation rather than presented as a monthly insurance premium or deductible.

In Canada, healthcare funding flows through a combination of federal transfers (CHT), provincial taxes, employer payroll taxes, and individual income‑based health premiums. These mechanisms create the illusion of “free” care because the consumer never sees a bill at the doctor’s office. Instead, the costs are embedded in the tax structure, quietly deducted long before the patient ever steps into a clinic.

One of the most significant components of Canadian healthcare funding is the Employer Health Tax (EHT)—a payroll tax applied to businesses based on total compensation paid to employees. In provinces such as Manitoba and Quebec, this tax can reach over four percent of payroll.

While the tax is levied on employers, its economic burden does not remain there. Businesses inevitably pass these costs on to consumers through higher prices, reduced wages, or slower hiring. Canadians may not see a healthcare bill, but they pay for healthcare every time they buy groceries, fill their gas tank, or purchase consumer goods whose prices have quietly risen to absorb payroll taxes.

Beyond employer taxes, individual Canadians also contribute directly through provincial health premiums and income‑based surcharges. Ontario, for example, includes a “Health Premium” on its tax return that can reach up to $900 per year depending on income. Other provinces embed healthcare funding within general income tax brackets, meaning a portion of every paycheck is siphoned into the healthcare system without explicit labeling.

This is why many Canadians believe they pay nothing for healthcare—because the payment is hidden inside broader taxation rather than itemized as a healthcare expense. In reality, most middle‑income Canadians contribute between $400 and $800 annually through these mechanisms, in addition to the indirect costs they incur due to higher consumer prices.

Keep reading

‘Free Stuff’ in Norway Still Costs Half of Average Pay

Every few years, Americans rediscover Scandinavia. 

Someone visits Norway or Denmark, returns dazzled and envious of parental leave and universal childcare and asks why America refuses to copy what obviously works. On the day dedicated to celebrating America, Nicholas Kristof, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, wrote for The New York Times that America is so great that, in fact, it should be more like Norway. If American companies can pay high wages and generous benefits to workers there, Kristof observed, they could do so in New York, too.

If only America were willing to embrace a little more social democracy and bigger government, this popular and recurring story goes, perhaps it could enjoy the same prosperity and flourishing that Norway does – and have its population also routinely rank among the happiest on the planet.

I was born and raised in one Nordic country, have worked in another and for the last six years have lived in a third, so I’m fairly familiar with our way of life. I’ve also spent much time in America, stunned and enamoured of the way things are in the vast, diverse and unruly union of states. Europeans are simultaneously fascinated and bewildered by America. 

Plenty of things are amazing about these United States, and quite a few things awful about the Nordics; I suspect American intellectuals, dreaming about Norway without understanding its nature and trade-offs, overlook both.

“You Want Security, Health Care and the American Dream? Look to Scandinavia”

Norwegian workers certainly have higher wages than those in many European countries, including those of its fellow Scandinavians. Hotel cleaners, retail clerks and construction workers often earn salaries that surprise visiting Americans. Thanks to Baumol’s cost disease, decades of well-managed petroleum wealth have pushed up industrial and service wages. 

The first thing an American professional moving to Norway would notice isn’t the generous parental leave, but the great loss of disposable income and material well-being. Norwegian households average 30 percent less disposable income than those the US, and the cost of everyday items is much higher. 

The Scandinavian bargain might look like free services, but it as trade-off: more public goods, fewer private goods. 

When American politicians or intellectuals promise Nordic welfare states, most people imagine this happening automatically or by taxing the rich and everybody benefits. That’s not the case. The real Nordic model taxes earners more (45 per cent in Denmark, 40 in Norway, 41 in Sweden, compared to 25 per cent in the United States) and charging flat value added tax (“VAT”). Broad welfare states require broad tax bases; Nordic welfare states are financed not by billionaires but by ordinary workers. The “free” benefits are bought with invasive and regressive consumption taxes (up to 25 percent), payroll taxes and income taxes that reach well and that begin after just $10,000 (the first $16,000 is tax free in the US). 

An American professional, pocketing the median earnings of about $65,000, would pay over $17,000 in Norwegian income taxes (compared to about $5,000 per the IRS calculator, naturally subject to state taxes and various deductions), with the employer forced to chip in another $9,200 for the privilege of merely hiring him/her. From what’s left over, he/she faces a high cost of living and sales taxes between 11 per cent and 25 per cent. 

Were she/he in Sweden, a much poorer country with wages well below Norway’s, our middle-of-the-road American professional would land himself/herself in the top 20 per cent of earners – though not yet triggering the top 53 per cent (or 64 per cent) marginal tax rates.

Keep reading

The great affordability hoax

Many politicians are so superficial that they’re inclined to latch on to a popular buzzword — in droves — to sustain their power over the masses.  “Affordability” is now filling that need.  Ignorance of economic reality is sustaining this process.

There are two significant concepts that pull the rug out from under this pathetic hoax: consumer sovereignty and the principle of substitution.  Consumer sovereignty simply means that free people get to choose how they spend their money.  Necessities such as food and shelter tend to dominate these choices, but Americans, being the beneficiaries of the prosperity that comes with freedom, have room for other items in their budgets.  The principle of substitution means that a consumer gets to choose from a multiplicity of similarly priced options — that they will ultimately spend their money on.

All of this freedom, for the political world, is the problem.  People still get to live their own lives.  How anti-progressive can this be?

Harping on “affordability” is intended to lead to adopting the long worn out means for suppressing market forces known as “price controls.”  The folly of this form of demagoguery was showcased in Studs Terkel’s The Good War.  First, he provides a statement from John Kenneth Galbraith, breathlessly extolling the virtues of government-imposed price controls during the days of rationing caused by a profound national emergency.  After all, the American people still managed to survive during such trying times.

Immediately after Galbraith’s presentation, Terkel posted a statement from the humble owner of a neighborhood grocery store.  In it, he first tells of what happened to a can of pork and beans: Yes, the price of the can didn’t change.  But in the can was less pork and fewer beans, and a lot more water.  Also, since his store was closed on Sunday, black marketeers took it over to sell otherwise rationed meat.  And the line of eager customers stretched around the block.  Talk about consumer sovereignty.

To further deceive the public about affordability, the “news” media make no distinction between true inflation due to government carelessly increasing the money supply and price increases caused by shortages resulting from various causes.  The bottleneck at the Strait of Hormuz has nothing to do with public debt and deficit spending.  And yes, the bump up in petroleum has increased the cost of all forms of transportation, including produce and many other commodities being delivered to retail stores.

Now back to my original point: Leftists are confined to a pre-determined position.  This can easily be described as conformity.  Rather than be confined by the “arbitrary” dictates of reality, leftists close ranks and join in with mutual agreement.  They have become carbon copies of one another.  Their policy positions are pretty much pre-packaged — so they all seem to agree with one another on everything.  The package includes opposition to white supremacy, corporate greed, and global warming, while strenuously extolling the benefits of “affordability.”

Instead of offering commonsense solutions to obvious problems, they keep pushing free stuff and victimhood.  And guess what: It’s not working.  Beyond the devoted automatons, sentient beings are abandoning the deranged demagoguery of what used to be a sort of credible major party: the Democrats.

Keep reading

Dem L.A. Mayor Karen Bass Proposes Free Teeth for Meth Addicts

Failed Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has proposed a new government program for her failed city: free teeth for meth addicts, paid for by taxpayers.

Speaking at an event this week, Bass floated her latest idea to further destroy and bankrupt what was once a great city…

How many people who are unhoused that you meet have no teeth at all?” she asked. “They don’t have teeth, why? Because meth rots your teeth. You can’t succeed without teeth! So there needs to be comprehensive healthcare provided to people.”

This is like refurnishing a house that’s still on fire.

This has to be one of the most ridiculous ideas anyone has ever come up with, and she actually uses the retarded term “unhoused.”

What good does it do to fix the teeth of a meth head? Who’s going to look at a meth head’s smile and say, Please work my cash register.

And we’re not talking about a cleaning here. We’re talking about tens of thousands of dollars in dental care. Implants cost about $6000 per tooth. Extractions run around $300 per tooth. Meth heads will almost certainly require bone grafts, sinus lifts, and maybe even sedation. Are we going to trust meth heads with dentures, which are cheaper at around $5000, but likely to end up in a pawn shop or left behind in a crack house?

In my experience, you’re looking at a total cost in the range of $30,000 to $80,000, and that’s if the city pays the dentist directly, which it won’t. The whole program will be funneled through a non-profit or NGO, which will double or triple the cost to taxpayers (with sweet kickbacks to Democrats), just like Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D-CA) “free” diaper program tripled the cost of the diapers the government (i.e. taxpayers) bought.

As for “my experience,” it’s been two years and counting of paying massive dental bills out of my own pocket, just like every other law-abiding taxpayer in America.

You mean, all I have to do to get my dental bills paid is smoke meth?

Medicare doesn’t even cover dental, which means people who have worked all their lives and paid into the system do not have government help paying their dental bills. Ah, but the government will assist degenerate meth addicts.

Keep reading

Gavin Newsom’s ‘Free’ Diapers Cost More Than 3 Times Costco Diapers

The “free” diapers that failed Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) is handing out will cost taxpayers more than three times as much as Costco diapers.

One person who deals in baby products says it could be as high as eight to ten times as much.

Why?

Because this isn’t about giving new mothers 400 free diapers. Rather, it is about Newsom using a government program to funnel millions of taxpayer dollars to the nonprofit organization Baby2Baby, which is led by an executive who sits on the board of California Partners Project, which was co-founded by Newsom’s insufferable wife, Jennifer Siebel-Ocasio-Rodham Newsom.

As a not-so great American once said, the math ain’t mathing…

According the far-left Los Angeles Times, in its first year, the “state plans to distribute 40 million diapers.”

We also know that the cost of this program in year one is $20 million.

So, the state will pay 50 cents per diaper.

And yet, California is lousy with Costco stores, where you can buy diapers for 16 cents each.

If that’s the case, why is Gavin Newsom forcing taxpayers to pay 50 cents per diaper for Baby2Baby to distribute them when he could simply have maternity wards hand these 100,000 new mothers a Costco coupon for 400 free diapers, which would cost the taxpayers about a third as much?

Did I mention that the top executive at Baby2Baby is pals with Newsom’s insufferable wife?

You see, that’s how the government grift works. That’s how corrupt politicians pay off their pals. It’s all hidden in a compassionate-sounding government program when it’s really a taxpayer-funded payoff.

Allow me to speculate for a moment…

Baby2Baby probably pays a wholesale price for diapers that is much less than 16 cents each. Sure, there’s staff salaries and delivery costs, but come on… 50 cents each? Amazon can deliver them for half that. That leaves a lot of money left over for, say, massive presidential 2028 campaign contributions or direct kickbacks to Mr. and Mrs. Governor.

Keep reading