The author’s claim that the postwar history of New York set a background in which a charismatic CEO like Michael Bloomberg could be elected was very interesting. One of our readings from another week talked about the time after World War II to be when the unions gained power and when there was a giant wave of strikes. In this book, the author describes this period as the golden age. This was when the economy was strong and diversified, when the union was strong, and when people had good health and pension benefits, housing, and access to higher education at little or no cost. Reading about this golden age made me feel a bit wistful, even though I didn’t even live in that time period. How has New York gone so far and wrong into our current economy?
I thought it was interesting how the New York City elites turned the fiscal crisis into an opportunity to bring upon changes that would benefit them and reduce the power of labor and minorities. And this particular passage in the book stood out to me: “The fact that urban criss emerged as a fiscal crisis led to the notion that balancing budgest, implementing cost-saving measures and financial plans, and ensuring access to bond markets were to be prioritized over all other governmental activities.” This led to depoliticizing and the running of New York as a business. I understand that money is an important issue in the well-being of the city. But it seems that emphasis on business and money has taken away the benefits, power, and importance of the working class. The centering of New York on business has led to less services and jobs, reorientation of governmental priorities, and benefits of business owners, particularly through the reduction of taxes on businesses.
The concept of a charismatic CEO was intriguing in that people view such a person as one with supernatural or superhuman qualities. Bloomberg’s way of “getting things done,” “no political entanglements” and autonomy reminded me of Robert Moses, and I wondered whether a good leader, at least in New York, has to have autonomous control in order to bring about good change. Bloomberg definitely is a good businessman, but I wonder if a city should really be run as a business. A “CEO is the ultimate risk taker and decision maker” so I guess all the honor or blame will go to this one person.
