Poor Manhattan

New York stared into the future this week and saw a city without investment bankers. Many shuddered. There were chilling rumours of orders cancelled for a new 13,000 luxury mobile phone, of maicirc;tre d8217;s erasers hovering ominously over the 1,000 lobster and caviar frittata at Norma8217;s restaurant. 8220;It8217;s very frightening,8221; said Sherry Baroness von Koeber-Bernstein, a socialite. 8220;I grew up with Lehman Brothers.8221; But for the rest of the city, who grew up with Scooby Doo, surely now was the moment to raise a cheer. New Yorkers have been grousing for years about how the yuppies and their super-rich idols have ruined the city, turning its once gritty streets into a bland millionaires8217; playground which no one else can afford to play in. And yet there8217;s been barely a whoop. Don8217;t they want rid of them, after all? 8230;New York has a complicated relationship with its mega-rich. Being part of America, the full-throttle Schadenfreude of the British is not an option. Coarse abuse of the kind dealt to merchant bankers in London is unthinkable 8212; New Yorkers know they get too much out of them.

And history shows 8212; look at Philadelphia and Cleveland 8212; what can happen when the rich desert US cities. But they are New Yorkers, and some things are supposed to matter more than money. Fran Lebowitz, the author and social commentator, was at a glitzy party to launch a Vanity Fair book when someone asked her if she was worried about the crash. 8220;Are you kiddin8217;? I can8217;t wait!8221; she said. 8220;Just when you think how horrible New York has become in terms of things interfering with the tone of the city, they8217;re finally leaving!8221; She meant rich people, she added, wearing her signature outfit, a Savile Row suit. She meant the rich people you don8217;t see at Vanity Fair parties 8212; the ones in chinos, blazers and penny loafers.

Excerpted from a comment by Tom Leonard in 8216;The Daily Telegraph8217;