Mr. Lhota said that Mr. de Blasio’s “knee-jerk response to any new program is to raise taxes,” an approach he said was “instinctively wrong.” Instead, Mr. Lhota said the mayor should look to find efficiencies in the city’s budget.
Ah…you can’t make this stuff up. A “knee-jerk” response to increase revenue is bad, but cutting the budget is obviously good, especially since he and his friends will not even feel it. But how does he know this for a fact? Raising taxes is “instinctively wrong.” Might we say that Mr. Lhota has a knee-jerk response to tax hikes on the wealthy? Sure seems like it. It’s just pure instinct.
Of course, Mr. Lhota’s response to increased taxes for the wealthy may be instinct only among his social circle, so it is probably a learned response, with no instinct involved at all, but it sure seems like a reflex!
The article also includes this:
He mounted a direct attack on Mr. de Blasio’s “tale of two cities” campaign theme, saying that Mr. de Blasio was trying to “separate classes” as a political strategy.
“Calling it a tale of two cities, that level of invective has no place in any campaign, at all,” Mr. Lhota said. “It divides people. What we really need to do is to work together and provide a solution, not separating people and then saying that the ends justify the means.”
I would like to know what level of invective is appropriate in a campaign according to Mr. Lhota? Tale of two cities seems rather tame to me. By all means, let’s work together to raise taxes on Mr. Lhota.