To contrast Bloomberg’s New York and The New Deal spurs off many opposing, yet both logical ideas and thoughts. While we can all agree that New York City is quite a complicated and complex place, the approach to fixing our financial depression (if you call it that) can on the other hand be filled with fiery opposing opinions.
Mayor (CEO) Bloomberg had an ingenious idea, as expected of a CEO, to not go the “normal” way of fixing a broken economy. Bloomberg focused on the marketing and production of the show and product that is New York City. He reached out to the entertainment and luxurious aspects of NYC. Although people may speak negatively of the perceived broadening socioeconomic gap due to the income of wealth and power being attracted to the city, these sources of entertainment and daily upkeep also require the creation on manual jobs. Looking at NYC, how many people actually live in midtown? Bloomberg set up satellite boroughs in order to attract more money NYC from the people that at first might not be able to afford pricy NYC. These outer satellites allow for people of all economic standing to live. Naturally, people in different economic classes will not live next door to each other. Naturally, the center of all of this activity, here, NYC, will lead to a greater upper class demographic. Yet, this is only natural. Milan, London, and other major cities that are known for their great economic activity also have less wealthy satellite areas to accommodate for those wanting to participate in all the potential.
Mike Wallace on the other hand proposed to look at our history to find a cure for the present. He proposed to go back to similar plans made out to fix the depression of the 1930’s. I have always wondered why we could not just create more jobs and execute a similar plan. It seemed to have worked before, why not try it again? It makes sense, that in order to create more jobs, small businesses should be promoted to create economic flow and more job opportunities; as well as the need for more public service jobs. Yet, we also have to keep in mind that NYC has changed since the Great Depression. What Bloomberg has done, is, he gave the people what they wanted. He took advantage of the people’s desire to travel and to feel like they are in the most important city in the world. The Internet has allowed the world to become so much smaller because of the ease to see what’s on the other side of the world. We also have to understand that the public service jobs that were originally created for the Great Depression may not be as needed or available as they once were.
It seems to be a recurring theme for me to weekly go back to the same conclusion, yet it all makes sense. New York City is a complicated city. I can’t propose one idea over the other because they both (theoretically) could work. Lots of the economic flow in NYC is due to the active tourism. Yet, with all the activity in the heart of NYC, there is also plenty of activity on the outside in such places like Brooklyn and Queens. The satellite boroughs also allow for the blending of economic activity and actual living space, while the NYC that we think of when we say NYC focuses more on the economy. In summary: Its complicated.
