New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani spent months targeting wealthy New Yorkers and pushing for higher taxes on corporations. Now he's sitting down with the CEOs of JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs, hoping the same people he vilified will help bankroll his progressive agenda.
The meetings, with Jamie Dimon and David Solomon, happened in recent days, Fox News reported. Mamdani also recently reached out to Citadel founder Ken Griffin, the billionaire hedge fund manager he had publicly attacked over Griffin's Manhattan penthouse and personal wealth.
The about-face has drawn pointed criticism from policy experts on the right, who say the mayor's courtship of Wall Street exposes a basic contradiction at the heart of his governing philosophy: you cannot fund free buses and subsidized housing by chasing away the people who generate the tax revenue to pay for them.
The timeline tells the story. For months, Mamdani attacked wealthy New Yorkers and pushed higher taxes on corporations. He stood outside Griffin's multimillion-dollar property in New York City to promote his proposal for higher taxes on second homes worth more than $5 million. He made class-warfare rhetoric a centerpiece of his political identity.
Then he picked up the phone.
Mamdani's outreach to Griffin, the same man he had singled out by name and address, drew a measured response from Citadel. The firm told FOX Business it "welcomes thoughtful, serious conversations about the policies that can grow the city's economy and create more opportunity for all New Yorkers." But the statement carried a warning, too: "reckless political theater serves no purpose."
That last line landed with the subtlety of a corporate cease-and-desist. Griffin knows something about walking away from cities that treat wealth creators as convenient targets. He pulled his business and billions out of Chicago, relocating to Florida, a move Heritage Foundation senior policy analyst Nicole Huyer cited as a cautionary example of corporate and capital flight.
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, described as the world's fourth-richest person, backed Griffin publicly on Wednesday. Speaking to CNBC, Bezos accused politicians of using an "age-old technique" of "picking a villain and pointing fingers."
"It isn't right... to stand in front of Ken Griffin's house and act like he is some kind of villain. Ken Griffin isn't a villain, he hasn't hurt anybody, he's not hurting New York, in fact quite the opposite."
When two of the wealthiest men on the planet feel compelled to say out loud that creating jobs and paying taxes shouldn't make someone a target, it suggests the political environment in New York City has drifted far from common sense.
This is hardly the first time Mamdani has faced blowback for the gap between his rhetoric and his governing decisions. He recently dropped a property tax hike after public backlash, even as a $5.4 billion budget hole remained unresolved.
Adam Lehodey, an economic policy expert at the Manhattan Institute, told Fox News Digital that the Mamdani administration has started to grasp a reality that was obvious to everyone else from the beginning.
"The Mamdani administration has come to recognize that so much of their agenda depends on having successful businesses and wealth creators in the city. Simply alienating them isn't going to solve any of New York's problems."
Lehodey said the meetings were a positive step, but only a first one. The real test, he argued, is whether Mamdani follows through with substantive policy changes rather than treating the sit-downs as political cover.
"The current tax-the-rich strategy is only going to worsen the problems unless he follows up and says, 'Let's look at what we can do to make it easier to invest in New York State and New York City.'"
That distinction matters. Mamdani's progressive priorities, including free childcare and subsidized housing, require enormous revenue. Wall Street and high-income taxpayers generate a major share of New York City's tax base. Drive them out, and the programs collapse. Court them without changing policy, and the meetings are just theater.
The mayor's budget struggles have extended beyond taxes. His administration also faced backlash over a proposed $1 million cut to veterans services, a move that drew bipartisan criticism and raised further questions about the administration's spending priorities.
Nicole Huyer of The Heritage Foundation offered a blunt assessment. She told Fox News Digital that Dimon and Solomon lead "two of the nation's most influential financial institutions and have enormous influence over the financial sector and labor market."
"If policies drive major firms or wealthy taxpayers out of New York City, the impact on tax revenue, jobs and broader economic activity could be significant."
Huyer characterized Mamdani's meetings as an effort to repair strained ties with New York's business community after his "tax the rich" campaign rhetoric. But she cautioned that the pivot itself carries political risk.
"Pitching class warfare and then pivoting to court Wall Street executives risks appearing politically performative."
That word, performative, captures the core problem. Mamdani built his political brand on demonizing the wealthy. Now he needs their cooperation, their investment, and their tax dollars. The question is whether anyone at those boardroom tables believes the mayor's outreach is sincere, or whether they see it as another act in what Citadel called "reckless political theater."
Mamdani has shown a pattern of navigating political tensions without committing to firm positions. He refused to say whether he backed an AOC primary challenge against Senator Schumer, keeping one foot in every camp while avoiding accountability to any of them.
The fundamental problem isn't that Mamdani met with Dimon and Solomon. Meeting with the city's largest employers and taxpayers is what a responsible mayor should do. The problem is everything that came before.
You don't spend months attacking an entire class of New Yorkers, stand on a billionaire's doorstep to score political points, push tax proposals designed to punish wealth, and then show up asking for cooperation without acknowledging the damage your rhetoric caused.
Griffin's relocation from Chicago to Florida proved that capital goes where it's welcome. New York City isn't immune to the same forces. The city's tax base depends on firms and individuals who have options, and who exercise them when the political environment turns hostile.
Critics have also questioned whether Mamdani's public gestures match his private governing. He skipped the Met Gala to spotlight fashion workers while dodging debates and leaving campaign promises unfulfilled, a pattern that suggests the mayor is more comfortable with symbolic stands than with the hard work of governing a city of eight million people.
No specific tax proposals, bill text, or formal policy documents tied to Mamdani's agenda have been made public. That leaves open the question of whether the Wall Street outreach signals a genuine policy shift or simply a new phase of political positioning ahead of budget fights to come.
The open questions are straightforward. Will Mamdani change his tax proposals in response to what he heard from Dimon, Solomon, and Griffin's team? Will he offer concrete incentives to keep firms and capital in New York? Or will the meetings serve as a photo opportunity while the same anti-business agenda moves forward behind closed doors?
Lehodey's framing was clear: the meetings only matter if substantive policy follows. Huyer's warning was equally direct: the economic consequences of driving out major firms and wealthy taxpayers would hit ordinary New Yorkers hardest, in lost jobs, reduced services, and a shrinking tax base.
Free buses need billionaires. So does free childcare, subsidized housing, and every other line item on the progressive wish list. Mamdani can sit across the table from Wall Street all he wants. Until his policies match his new tone, the meetings are just another performance, and the people footing the bill know it.
