Wall Street giant Apollo aims to open 'second headquarters' outside NYC - in latest fallout from Mamdani's war on the wealthy
https://t.co/ozffxGvIbE pic.twitter.com/kNwowJ0Mqw— New York Post (@nypost) May 6, 2026
Posted on 05/07/2026 8:15:31 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Democratic tax policies always follow the same basic script: They tax the wealthy. The wealthy leave. Democrats increase taxes on the middle class and everyone else to make up for the revenue losses. Economic destruction follows.
That's going to happen in New York City, too, as Zohran Mamdani's "tax the rich" plans have prompted the start of a wealth exodus from the Big Apple.
Wall Street giant Apollo aims to open 'second headquarters' outside NYC - in latest fallout from Mamdani's war on the wealthy
https://t.co/ozffxGvIbE pic.twitter.com/kNwowJ0Mqw— New York Post (@nypost) May 6, 2026
Yet another major Wall Street firm is poised to expand outside New York City – the latest blow to the Big Apple’s tax coffers thanks to Mayor Zohran Mandani’s war on wealthy residents and businesses, The Post has learned.
Private equity giant Apollo Global Management, headquartered in Manhattan, has decided to open a new business hub — internally dubbed its “second headquarters” — in either Florida or Texas with an official decision likely to be made public in the coming weeks, people close to the matter say.
The new outpost could eventually become home to as many as 1,000 employees over time – in line with Apollo’s current headcount in New York, the sources said. The buyout firm currently employs more than 6,000 worldwide.
That's Marc Rowan, who is CEO of Apollo.
And Ken Griffin, the billionaire Mamdani specifically targeted, is moving jobs out of the city, too.
Billionaire Ken Griffin scales back NYC jobs in response to Mamdani’s ‘tax the rich’ antics — sparking fears wealthy exodus has begun. Read today's cover here:
https://t.co/lBxpjMxIbv pic.twitter.com/Eb3mln0xde— New York Post (@nypost) May 7, 2026
They're not alone. According to The New York Post, real estate tycoon Steve Roth, chairman of Vornado Realty Trust, called Mamdani “irresponsible and dangerous.”
“I must say that I consider the phrase tax the rich — quote ‘tax the rich’ — when spit out with anger and contempt by politicians both here and across the country, to be just as hateful as some disgusting racial slurs, and even the phrase ‘from the river to the sea,’" Roth said.
They have every right to leave. Democrats think they're entitled to a billionaire's wealth, and will use the power of the state to confiscate it. So those billionaires wisely go where politicians won't rob them blind for wasteful, fraudulent "social welfare" programs and to prop up overpaid government jobs.
Despite this, Mamdani doesn't seem to care if they go.
🚨 Socialist Zohran Mamdani shrugs as Citadel CEO Ken Griffin flees NYC for Miami: “No regrets, we’re taxing the rich their ‘fair share.’”
Translation: Keep attacking successful people and watch more jobs, capital, and billionaires bolt.
Mamdani is destroying NYC. pic.twitter.com/Qmx2KOtPkT— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) May 6, 2026
"No regrets."
That should terrify all the New Yorkers who aren't billionaires. Because they're next in line for Mamdani's "tax the rich" scheme. Democrats know this, too. That's why California's billionaire tax, which will be on the ballot in November, has a provision that allows Democrats to apply the wealth tax to all Californians if the future. That means a lot of middle-class families will have to fork over five percent (or more) of their total wealth, including property value, to the government every year. With the median home price $854,000, that's a bill of at least $42,700 annually.
There's no reason to believe the same thing won't happen in New York. Mamdani will call it "fairness" and blame billionaires. But the fault will be his and his alone.
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Democrats say they don’t care…and then sick tax agencies on them when they try to leave.
A new meme is born:
How bad are things?
Zo Bad....
Mamdani's Response Is Infuriating Fully Expected by anyone who has been paying attention.
Thanks for posting this. I learned something new, especially about the provision for eventually taxing everyone via the billionaire tax law in California. Why ppl haven’t gotten out of there by now I’ll never understand. We left 30 yrs ago & it’s really gone off the deep end since then.
Could someone more knowledgeable please fill me in?
Isn’t it true some large corporate headquarters have leases and agreements mean they are stuck where they are in NYC?
And are there penalties for leaving due to special favors given by a state such as NY? States have deals to lure various companies to put in manufacturing plants, for example?
Do some corporations have to pay incentive or full freight for many hundreds of employees to leave to go to the new location?
Are there other drawbacks I don’t know about?
Thanks in advance.
A large number of billionaires such as the Silicon Valley, Hollywood and other types are big wokesters.
Like the Ben and Jerry’s and other types.
Example: Strong statements of support and policies supporting BLM by: Ben and Jerry’s, Nike, Apple, Amazon, Google, Citigroup, and Netflix.
Aren’t a lot of the NYC ones that way?
California is about 7 bucks a gallon...
10 bucks I heard in spots. It’ll be
A Ration Summer !
It's real, and one suspects that a complete move is at least in the discussion stages.
Maybe with a new name...SE Texas?
He is fulfilling his promise to his constituents. Always good.
Oh they care. They WANT the wealthy to leave. And whites in general, conservatives and Republicans of course, even the middle class.
They want a poor angry and uneducated population that will keep them in power forever.
Many billionaires with established businesses have left, are about to leave but for a while now are not expanding or making new investments within New York. Its not just billionaires. Given a choice investors are not investing private capital into the high tax, regulation clogged, hostile to capitalism places. Without new investment a locale deteriorates quickly. The New York skyline looks beautiful at night but the truth is those office towers have record high vacancies and non government tenants are reluctant to sign long term leases. Wonder who will pay for the electricity to keep them lit.
Mamdani doesn’t care about the long term impact on permanent residents. He and his parents have a history of moving around the world, he will leave NYC
he knows he will only be in office for 4 years, he may think 8 years
He knows if he can establish the principle of certain types of taxation they will be near impossible to get rid of.
he will try to have the rest of the state subsidize NYC to keep the city afloat for his short tenure (non-NYC residents are 57% of the state population)
Below is an excerpt from a Harvard study Published in The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, V21 N1 by Harvard researchers by Edward L. Glaeser and Andrei Shleifer back in 2005 ( perhaps not so coincidentally timed to coincide with when the Democrats started their jihad of class warfare political insanity) that explains the rational for the Democrats redistributionist policies as tool to intimidate and maintain control of the electorate.
The study is based on the strategy adopted by Boston mayor James Michael Curley to break the backs of the Yankee Brahmins political opposition and keep an iron grip on power for 40 years. Boston has never recovered from the destruction that Curley inflicted on Boston as a result of the onslaught of dysfunction , incompetence, machine politics, patronage, waste, fraud, corruption and that Curley engineered to maintain his electoral control of Boston for a generation.
The paper perfectly explains what we see in places like NYC, Detroit, Seattle, Portland, Philly, the Twin Cities, Atlanta and California
And remember, this is from Democrat Harvard University think tank so the Democrat political leadership has read this and is using it literally as a text book example on how to take permanent political control of a city or state by destroying the economic base of a city or state to drive out political opposition and keep an iron grip on the remaining impoverished population by the selective, patronage based distribution of government welfare money to reward their friends and punish their opposition.
Read this and everything the Democrats with their Dystopia by Design social polices are doing makes perfect logical sense - including the importation of millions of welfare dependent Third World illegal aliens to replace the educated and productive voters they have driven out. And mentioned above, the rise of the Democrats descent into class warfare and economic destruction and the rise of Barak Obama really kicked into high gear shortly after this paper was published.
“The Curley Effect: The Economics of Shaping the
Electorate
Edward L. Glaeser
Harvard University and NBER
Andrei Shleifer
Harvard University and NBER
James Michael Curley, a four-time mayor of Boston, used wasteful redistribu-
tion to his poor Irish constituents and incendiary rhetoric to encourage richer
citizens to emigrate from Boston, thereby shaping the electorate in his favor.
As a consequence, Boston stagnated, but Curley kept winning elections. We
present a model of using redistributive politics to shape the electorate, and
show that this model yields a number of predictions opposite from the more
standard frameworks of political competition, yet consistent with empirical
evidence.
1. Introduction
Early in World War I, a wounded British officer arrived in Boston to recruit
citizens of the then-neutral United States to fight in the British army. He po-
litely asked the by then legendary Irish mayor of Boston, James Michael
Curley, for permission. Curley replied, ‘‘Go ahead Colonel. Take every damn
one of them.’’ This statement captures Curley’s lifelong hostility to the Anglo-
Saxons of Boston, whom he described as ‘‘a strange and stupid race,’’ and his
clear wish that they just leave. Throughout his four terms, using a combination
of aggressive redistribution and incendiary rhetoric, Curley tried to transform
Boston from an integrated city of poor Irish and rich protestants into a Gaelic
city on American shores.
Curley’s motivation is clear. In his six mayoral races between 1913 and
1951, he represented the poorest and most ethnically distinct of Boston's Irish.
The city's Brahmins despised him because of his policies, his corruption, and
his rhetoric, and always worked to block his victory. Curley’s expected share
of Boston's vote was, to a first approximation, strictly increasing in the share of
poor Irish among the Bostonians. Unsurprisingly, he tried to turn Boston into
a city that would elect him.
We call this strategy—increasing the relative size of one's political base
through distortionary, wealth-reducing policies—the Curley effect. But it is
hardly unique to Curley. Other American mayors, but also politicians around
the world, have pursued policies that encouraged emigration of their political
enemies, raising poverty but gaining political advantage. In his 24 years as
mayor, Detroit's Coleman Young drove white residents and businesses out
of the city. ‘‘Under Young, Detroit has become not merely an American city
that happens to have a black majority, but a black metropolis, the first major
Third World city in the United States. The trappings are all there—showcase
projects, black-fisted symbols, an external enemy, and the cult of personality’’
(Chafets, 1991:177). Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe abused white
farmers after his country's independence, openly encouraging their emigration
even at a huge cost to the economy.
The Curley effect turns traditional views about the requirements for good
government on their head. Writers like Olson (1993) argue that sufficiently
forward-looking leaders would avoid policies that harm their electorate. But
the Curley effect relies critically on forward-looking leaders: when it oper-
ates, longer time horizons raise the attraction of socially costly political con-
duct. Others follow Tiebout (1956) in arguing that large response elasticities
to bad policies serve to limit them: ‘‘the fiscal discipline that is forced upon
these units [local governments] emerges from the mobility of resources
across subordinate governmental boundaries within the inclusive territorial
jurisdiction’’ (Brennan and Buchanan, 1980:178). With the Curley effect,
in contrast, large response elasticities make bad policies more, not less, at-
tractive to incumbents.
In this article we formalize the Curley effect. By differentially taxing dif-
ferent groups of voters, the incumbent leader can encourage emigration of one
of the groups, and maximize the share of the voters who support him. While
benefiting the incumbent, these taxes may actually impoverish the area and
make both groups worse off.
We assume that the incumbent has an innate appeal to the lower-status
group. This appeal results from ethnic or class identity, and is one determinant
of the voting decision. Our model differs from that of Alesina, Baqir, and East-
erly (1999), who focus on the variations in the preferences for public goods
across ethnicities but do not consider changes in the electorate. Our model also
follows the work on inefficient redistribution through public employment and
other means (e.g., Clark and Ferguson, 1983; Alesina and Rodrik, 1994;
Persson and Tabellini, 1994; Shleifer and Vishny, 1994; Coate and Morris,
1995; Alesina, Bagir, and Easterly 2000; Robinson and Verdier, 2002). More
generally, our work relates to the large body of research on inefficient but
politically motivated public policies (e.g., Barro, 1973; Aghion and Bolton,
1990; Persson and Svensson, 1989; Besley and Coate, 1998). Our innovation
is the idea that such wasteful redistribution and other public policies shape the
electorate by influencing the migration decision.”
Retirement funds, 401ks, IRAs, Roths, stock gains, annuities, it’s all fair game to Democrat$.
I think that Seattle and the State of Washington just attached over 4 billion dollars of LEO and First Responder pension funds to fund their insane homeless, LGBTQ+ and social welfare programs
Nice to see that no one has called him or his allies “stupid”. They are not well-meaning, but misguided idiots.
They know exactly what they’re doing.
Good post but I and others have been aware the some Democrats would rather drive out the hard workers, the rich and Republicans and rule over the ashes.
Many billionaires have already left California. It will blow a big hole in next years budget because they were already paying billions in cap gains taxes. All gone and not coming back.
Of course retirees have been fleeing for decades. Which further stresses the budget as they are replaced by low paid service workers and illegals with large families that use public hospitals, schools, etc.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
