Growing up in the Soviet Union, I witnessed firsthand the consequences of a centrally planned economy and the cultural mindset it created. In that system, everything was believed to be collectively owned, so some felt justified in taking from their workplaces. This wasn’t seen as theft, but rather reclaiming what was “theirs.”
This attitude was captured in the grim saying, “If you don’t steal, you won’t survive.” Indeed, the Russian economy under socialism was defined by chronic shortages. Basic necessities such as food, toilet paper, and hygiene products were often unavailable. To manage this, the government issued ration vouchers that limited how much each family could purchase. Choice was not an option. Rations replaced the free market, pushing many to rely on the black market just to survive.
Housing was another major issue. The state controlled all properties, so families were crammed into communal apartments, often sharing a single unit with multiple other families—complete strangers. Each family had only one private room, while kitchens and bathrooms were shared. I personally remember walking down the hallway that connected our room and kitchen to find it filled with a drunk, unconscious man who had urinated on himself. I was 4 years old.
Jobs were state-assigned, and salaries were nearly identical regardless of performance. This system discouraged hard work and ambition. Families had little to no opportunity to improve their financial situation or living conditions—unless they turned to illegal activity.
Consumer goods were uniform, limited, and low quality. Even today, many post-socialist apartments in Russia still have the same dining tables, light fixtures, and blankets from decades ago. To access better products, people relied on informal exchanges or the black market.
After living through this, it’s hard for me to understand those in New York City who long for a socialist-style economy. In fact, it seems the only New Yorkers pushing to elect democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani as the city’s next mayor are those who do not understand and have never experienced the consequences of the policies he’s proposed. Those of us who have struggled to afford rent or basic needs, on the other hand, know better. That’s why working-class New Yorkers—those making between $50,000 and $100,000 per year—didn’t vote for Mamdani, while wealthy voters did.
I understand Mamdani’s concerns about affordability in New York City. My family gives to charity regularly, and I don’t mind paying taxes. But when the system is abused, it becomes unsustainable. In fact, there are people who manage to spend their summers at the beach while their children attend free government-run camps, eat food bought with food stamps, and live in subsidized or free housing. We will never solve the city’s problems if public resources are stretched thin and misused.
Exerting even more government control over the city’s resources also will not help New Yorkers. If billionaires and large companies leave the city because of Mamdani’s tax-the-rich plan, we’ll lose jobs—and it’s people like my family who will be left to shoulder the cost of public programs. And city-run grocery stores—another one of Mamdani’s proposals—won’t put chains like Whole Foods out of business. They’ll crush the local mom-and-pop shops where owners have invested their life savings.
Take it from someone who experienced the consequences of socialism firsthand: Mamdani isn’t what New York City needs. Instead of expanding inefficient government programs, the city should support existing businesses—offer incentives, ensure fair pricing, and keep stores accountable. If we want to make food and rent more affordable, reduce taxes so that people have more disposable income. The more taxes we pay, the harder it becomes to afford life in this city.
Those of us who lived under the Soviet Union’s socialist policies learned all of this the hard way. I hope New York City wisens up before it too can say the same.
