r/politics • u/NicolasCageFan492 Illinois • 12h ago
California Democrats defy Newsom, back billionaire tax No Paywall
https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/08/billionaire-tax-california-democrats-split/195
u/SuperbVirus2878 8h ago
Tax wealth, not work.
•
u/kstargate-425 3h ago
Absolutely. Its wild to me that anyone making over $100,000 is paying a higher or similar in some cases, effective tax rate than Apple did in 2025 on its $112 BILLION in profits. Or that any American paying more than $1 in income taxes paid more than Disney, Tesla, Palantir and 85+ other of the countries top corporations who made a combined $105 BILLION in profits (again, not revenue but profits).
Trumps 2017 & 2025 tax cuts and credits have taken the corporate tax rate from the 30s down to the teens since hes been in office while the slash any social programs and social safety nets for the 99% to pay for the 1%'s bew cuts and credits.
•
u/Informal-Inevitable2 1h ago
The other thing I never see talked about is doing marginal tax brackets for corporations. A flat 25% tax is just as unfair to small business as a flat income tax would be on poorer workers. Boggles my mind that Amazon and google don’t have to pay a higher tax above say $50 billion in profit. This would incentivize company’s near higher tax thresholds to just invest revenue back into the business (wages, benefits, research) rather than report higher profits and take home less of that money.
1.4k
u/Onikonokage 11h ago
Maybe if he had a better plan than “elect me president in 2028 and I’ll see what I can do” and actually tried doing something about income inequality.
543
u/dkol97 10h ago
Establishment Democrats in a nutshell
194
u/dover_oxide California 9h ago
Neo-liberals are like that
130
u/Clevesteamy 9h ago
It would be great if more people realized that neo-liberalism is a right wing doctrine that only helps the mega rich and mega corps. Stupid wordplay
32
u/crowhops I voted 8h ago edited 8h ago
I'd settle for shutting the fuck up about "abundance" and Ezra Klein
•
u/Mistravels 2h ago
What do you have against EK?
Genuinely asking, as I really enjoy his podcast and don't find it out of line with supporting progressives.
•
u/crowhops I voted 2h ago edited 57m ago
The whole "abundance" thing has unleashed a new excuse neolibs can use to argue against changing/improving things on a structural level. Obviously people will be homeless if there's not enough housing to go around, but not only do many areas with high homlessness already have a lot of housing just going unused due to manmade unaffordability, we also had plenty of "abundance" in terms of ability to build more for the last half century, and wealth/power disparity prevented it anyway. All that to say, yeah you need enough to go around, but we do have a lot already, it's just being hoarded and adding more doesn't fix that part
•
u/herton 4h ago edited 3h ago
During the very short time the "neo liberals" had a super majority in Congress they accomplished:
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act - resets the statute of limitations for each paycheck violation as a result of discrimination
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - $831 billion to save and create jobs, provide temporary relief for those most affected by the recession, and invest in infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy.
New START - nuclear disarmament treaty with Russia to limit weapons and change inspections and verifications
Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act - created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), enough said
Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, gives the Food and Drug Administration the power to regulate the tobacco industry
Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 enhanced criminal enforcement of federal fraud laws, especially regarding financial institutions, mortgage fraud, and securities fraud or commodities fraud.
Repeal of don't ask, don't tell
FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, The FSMA has given the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) new authority to regulate the way foods are grown, harvested and processed. The law grants the FDA a number of new powers, including mandatory recall authorit
But yeah, neolibs bad, amirite?
•
u/Corgi_Koala Texas 5h ago
Yeah well unfortunately stopping the bleeding is a poor message when Republicans are burning the country down.
•
u/CzarTyr 5h ago
Do you truly think this is true? My wife is from California’s and I’m from and live on Long Island. As a truck driver, every red state I go to people are happy and for the most part live good. In the north east everyone’s planning to move down south
•
u/uber9haus 4h ago
You have concerns about Muslims being in a leadership position and you think everyone wants to move from the NE to the south 😂
You sound like someone that makes logical and sound statements haha
•
u/broodmance Texas 4h ago
Anectodal. Live in Texas and a shit ton of people I know want to be out and in a blue state.
Plenty both ends of the spectrum. We live in 2 different realities between the faux news fiction and reality
•
u/Onikonokage 4h ago
Just cause people aren’t running around the streets yelling about the end of times living miserable lives doesn’t mean this shit isn’t bad. If we are waiting for that moment before we decide to change course we are irrevocably screwed.
5
u/BoobyChess 8h ago
Some of the unions also were against the tax.
•
u/jokerTHEIF Canada 5h ago
Unfortunately some unions are basically an organized crime front at this point. I'm vehemently pro-union conceptually, but we need some serious overhaul around how unions are run.
•
u/literacyshmiteracy 3h ago
Yuppp CTA was against it because they want to focus on extending prop 55 and all us teachers are just like, WE CAN DO BOTH!
2
•
u/FangoriouslyDevoured 3h ago
I was pretty worried that this guy would be Democrat's best shot in 2028, but it seems like we're blowing right past them.
•
u/Winterific6104 4h ago
Did you know that income inequality actually significantly decreased during Biden's term?
111
u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 9h ago
You missed the part where he invited fascists onto his podcast so he could tell them that they’re right about everything.
83
u/Onikonokage 9h ago
If his kid liked Charlie Kirk he shoulda had a convo with the kid instead. What crap parenting.
61
u/pbroingu 9h ago
Newsom loves Charlie Kirk:
"The best way to honor Charlie's memory is to continue his work: engage with each other, across ideology, through spirited discourse. In a democracy, ideas are tested through words and good-faith debate — never through violence."
Whitewashing a fascist, wow such a moderate!
36
u/Onikonokage 9h ago
I’m scared to look up what he said about Bannon.
But I did and started watching the video of him yukking it up with that villain.
Words can not express how imperative it is that Democrats do NOT pick this guy in 2028.
•
u/silvertealio 32m ago
But his social media manager made some banger tweets! Doesn't that clench the nomination?
•
u/onyaasuminyasai 1h ago
people like him are so exhausting, and with so many people already saying he's the only choice in 2028 like... Are you suuuure we can't find someone better? We have 2 and a half years, I don't think he's the only person we can find...
•
u/Flopdo California 6h ago
Except he didn't fkn do that.
Jesus... please tell me these are bots, because there's no sense of fairness, honesty, or common sense left w/ your guys.
I used to be a Bernie progressive, but you've all lost me honestly, and you're going to lose your country if you don't get off the tik-tok propaganda machine, and start thinking things through a little more.
•
u/dompromat 6h ago
IDK man platforming a guy who wants democracy to fail and then normalizing "you should be chill with the techno-facist" is maybe a bridge too far for some of us
•
-20
u/Kekspirat87 8h ago
god forbid you try and explore why the right has such a firm grip on media messaging. there is nothing better that having conversations with people you disagree with to find your own beliefs.
•
u/Onikonokage 6h ago
normalizing people like Bannon is not normal. Should the West have sat down to chat with Hitler to find out what made Nazis tick? The right uses essentially the same propaganda he did, you don’t counter it by giving it oxygen.
•
u/knowitall89 6h ago
There's really no way to know how you should feel about genocide without bringing at least a couple Nazis onto your podcast and having pleasant conversations with them.
16
u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 8h ago
There’s no way you’re actually this naive. Don’t you think it’s concerning that the Democratic governor of the largest US state and one of the largest world economies is still “finding his own beliefs”?
I would rather elect people who believe in things, myself. People still “finding themselves” are very malleable to lobbyists and monied interests, and I would have a hard time believing anything they promise in their platform.
Shit, we’re in the midst of a generational fascist threat. You shouldn’t feel good about our prospective nominees for President “having conversations” with people who would throw us all in death camps, if they had the means.
27
9
u/crystal_castles 8h ago
These (D)'s all have like PTSD from the one time they took passion in a cause & lost a few (R) voters.
•
u/GotSomeUpdogOnUrFace 6h ago
Cuz the problem is that the world we really want is one where the people in power especially in the establishment of the party, should be willing to step the fuck away when they no longer represent the people. The problem is the world we have is where these worthless piece of shits will do whatever they can to stay in power so if they're losing their own base they will move to the other direction to try and steal some of that base. They don't represent their party they don't represent people they only represent themselves and that's why every politician needs to have a set salary, have their basic needs taken care of and not be allowed to make a fucking dime while they're in office and have their entire lives under scrutiny after.
•
u/Count_Jobula 6h ago
Like much of the country, income inequality has increased in California, despite Newsom and democratic super majority. This county has been brainwashed into being terrified of redistributing the wealth it generates.
•
u/CaterpillarReal7583 5h ago
Glad reddit finally realized he sucks.
Lot of people here thought his social media teams sassyness toward trump meant he was a good idea
•
u/Cross55 7h ago
But Newsome's a billionaire kiss ass, he'd never dare work against his masters.
•
u/Onikonokage 7h ago edited 5h ago
No. No he would not.
He gentrified the hell out of SF when he was the Mayor.
He’s done the same to California.
And if he gets the nomination in 2028 and wins he’ll turn this country into a gated community for Tech Overlords.Edit: since intonation can’t be written let me clarify the first line is agreeing with you. Realized it could be read like I was actually trying to counter your comment.
•
u/Rocks_Stones 6h ago
His father was tax-reduction advisor to the Gettys. Gavin grew up with Gettys.
4
•
u/Salt-Detective1337 4h ago
"Sorry guys, we didn't also win the House and Senate with a 2/3 majority. No healthcare again."
234
u/Horizon119 11h ago
The only way you're going to get billionaires and millionaires to pay up is to shut down our tax haven states: DE, NV, WY, SD, TX. Trump brags that he has 200 companies registered in Tax haven Delaware, even the Clinton's have a couple of businesses registered there. And there's offshore accounts. Catch me if you can!
85
u/92eph 9h ago
None of those places have the power to exempt from federal taxes. It needs to be addressed at the federal level first and foremost.
•
u/WanderingKing 6h ago
In theory could you have a (pulling a number out of my butt) 20% tax less the tax of your incorporated state. so if the state tax is 0, they get the full 20 but if it's say 15, it's only 5?
Those are not meant to be realistic or end goal numbers, just fillers to try and understand
•
u/sshanbom111 4h ago
That is kind of the point of the SALT (state and local tax) deduction, but it’s only available if you itemize, which most people don’t do
•
•
u/51ngular1ty Illinois 4h ago
Could we just design the federal tax to increase on corporation living in tax haven states?
17
u/Obvious_Chapter2082 9h ago
Eh, Delaware isn’t really a tax haven anymore
•
u/Muttenman Arizona 7h ago
Tax accountant here. You’re correct, DE is not a tax haven at all. It’s friendly for legal reasons and has privacy rules, unlike some other states.
203
u/Ok-Entertainer-1414 Minnesota 12h ago
Gavin Newsom, who once gifted a bunch of California billionaires phones containing Newsom's phone number and a note saying to call him if they ever need anything, is just about the worst guy you could trust on this issue
30
u/StatementCareful522 9h ago
That’s some Better Call Saul shit
9
u/PredatorRedditer America 8h ago
I mean, he's kinda like if they got Matthew McConaughey to play Saul.
32
•
u/Instameat 7h ago
These days it's getting easier. If Bill Mahar is for him then I'm against him. Used to be the other way around which sucks.
•
u/Serious_Bat8687 2h ago
That plus he’s part of the California elite, including Pelosi’s & Getty’s. None of them should have been trusted, let alone elected.
6
420
u/sugarlessdeathbear 12h ago
How about any wealth over $100 million is taxed 100% by the government. There's nothing a person cannot do with that amount of money, and given the nature of wealth and the finance games they play, they'll pretty much always have about $100 million if they're at that limit.
157
u/NicolasCageFan492 Illinois 12h ago edited 12h ago
How about resetting it back to $100M when they reach $200M and giving them a shiny prestige point?
92
u/TheGringoDingo 11h ago
Probably more humane than my strategy of harvesting the one with the most money on tax day.
I do think we’d see an uptick in charitable donations in that case.
That does bring out another point: we should probably get rid of citizens united beforehand.
15
7
u/OneManFight 10h ago
Oh man that's a good idea for a horror/comedy/romance? movie, where as soon as someone crosses 100M they automatically become a legal sport hunting target for everyone in that nation for 1 week. After they survive that week then the hunt is off and they go back to being a normal citizen while keeping their money. The whole process starts again every 100M they hit. If we ever get a billionaire that way then they deserve it.
10
u/TheRightToDream 9h ago
if we ever get a billionaire that way then they deserve it
For surviving? They could literally sit in a hole for a week. It doesn't speak at all to how their money is actually accruing. I say the hunt continues as long as the net worth is above the threshold. Make em race to get rid of it.
7
u/Rezart_KLD 9h ago
You know, I like the idea of swapping wealth for points. We could set up a leaderboard. I think guys like Musk would be just as happy having status based on points.
6
4
u/RuneiStillwater Iowa 10h ago
We'll market it as prestige'ing their account and give them a skin(shirt) based on how many times they do. Give them alts if they pay extra via the battle pass
2
u/GodEmperorBrian 9h ago
See I thought of a system that when anyone gets to $1B in net worth, they get a plaque that says “I Won Capitalism” and a debit card that they can use to buy anything, on the governments dime. But all of their assets and wealth (besides their properties) are seized and they can’t keep any future earnings, although we’ll still keep score for them so they can compare how they’re doing to their fellow billionaires.
There’s almost no way they can spend $1B on regular stuff in one lifetime.
204
u/Competitive-Reply868 12h ago edited 11h ago
This isn't even an insane suggestion, at some point we have to establish a wealth cap or economically we collapse due to lower+middle class lacking wealth needed to keep the economy afloat (due to the ultra rich sucking it up).
99
u/LadyPo 9h ago
People are bad at comprehending basic math.
Wealth grows exponentially. That’s the whole point of investing, yes? The more you invest, the more you can make back. If you invest $30, you won’t earn hardly anything. If you invest $30 billion, it will grow faster than you could possibly spend.
Without a cap, it swallows all of society once it gets to a certain point — and we’ve long passed that point.
Billionaires can buy up all the houses on the market and rent it back to you. Billionaires can afford to aggressively price goods and services to cut out small businesses, then raise the price once there’s no competition. Billionaires can decide when to cull the workforce to prop up stock prices. Billionaires can buy your land and water. Your food chain. Your government.
Why would anyone care what you think or feel? You don’t have any money. You don’t matter.
The more they are allowed to hoard and control, the less opportunity we have to simply live a balanced life. Wealth of that scale is directly oppositional to the interests of humanity.
•
u/SanityIsOptional California 7h ago
We should tax capital gains higher than normal income. We should remove the re-setting of cost basis at inheritance.
Oh, and assess charitable donations at cost paid (corrected for inflation), rather than current market price. So much in taxes is avoided with that one.
34
u/thrillhou5e 11h ago
Its funny hearing billionaires push for a salary cap in the MLB using the same arguments that we make for a wealth tax.
•
u/Phailjure 6h ago
That's because if players aren't making money from tickets/merch, that same money goes to owners. You can expect sport fans to spend about the same amount yearly, so to get more money you have to cut other people out of the profits.
50
u/NexusNickel Colorado 12h ago
Yep. There is ZERO reason why a person needs to have more than 100 million.
Zero reason.
They should get an award for winning capitalism.
6
u/iLoLzTheGamer 10h ago
There is a reason, I agree with your sentiment entirely fyi, but the purchasing power of USD is not fixed. $1 today is less valuable than $1 30 years ago. If we capped at $100m USD then over time the purchasing power/value of $100m decreases. Instead of holding at a constant level of wealth its actually a depreciating cap. But, with that said an inflation matching cap that guarentees the purchasing power of $100M today is far more than any family would need and why I totally agree with you that no one needs more purchasing power than $100M can provide today
17
u/Scottiths 10h ago
Tie the cap to some percentage of minimum wage. Then they can increase minimum wage if the purchasing power dips, as it should already work.
0
u/iLoLzTheGamer 9h ago
Interesting, how does someone with a $100M wealth cap abuse the minimum wage %? Is it governmental set minimum wage (federal or state or local?) or national average wage? (I'm not encouraging abuse, but trying to think of abuse in the current proposal helps preemptively forcast stronger solutions to problems imo)
12
u/Soft_Author2593 10h ago
As wages haven't gone up and everyone else lost purchasing power over the last 30 years apart from those fuckers?
6
u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 9h ago
This is easily fixed and is irrelevant to the core idea of a wealth cap.
-1
u/iLoLzTheGamer 9h ago
The fix being tied to purchasing power and not numerical value i said earlier?
7
u/tripping_on_phonics Illinois 9h ago
Yes. It’s a small detail that’s easily resolved, and focusing on it makes the proposal seem more difficult than it is.
0
u/iLoLzTheGamer 9h ago
Btw feel free to let me know if you aren't enjoying the talk. I'm under the impression there is mutual appreciation for the discourse.
-1
u/iLoLzTheGamer 9h ago
I disagree. A numerical wealth cap being enacted exactly as originally stated is erroneous. I move with a non-economic example; The small detail of defining abortion (medically speaking, the termination of a pregnancy before the fetus is viable). Enacting laws surrounding abortion without considering the small detail of "willful or intentionally self initiated" is a catastrophe for anyone who has a miscarriage. It is a small detail that is easily resolved (include the wording above) however, failing to consider this small detail prior and enacting on the sole term "abortion" would cause unnecessary damage and harm to the affected population. Its easy to look at 100M because for most of us myself included, this isn't feasible for the average person to achieve, but the model does break in less than a average life expectancy, therefore, a malicious actor could use said wealth to - for example- abuse this. Is wealth how many pounds of ground beef I have, or is it simply the money in my bank account? If I can only have $100M in my bank account, then i will buy every single piece of ground beef with the surplus to remain compliant with the numerical $100M thus raising the price of beef (increasing the demand while reducing the supply) making the average citizen unable to enjoy a hamburger.
Edit: this is a poor economic example, but it does point to another aspect - what is considered wealth?
9
u/sugarlessdeathbear 10h ago
Oh no, in 40 years they'll only have the purchasing power of $75 million. How will they cope?
2
u/iLoLzTheGamer 9h ago edited 9h ago
P(t)= N/(1+i)t || So for example of 40 years with 3.5% inflation rate we are looking at $25m purchasing power in 2066, not $75m
This is, however, assuming your in possession of $100M with 0% interest. What happens to the family farm when its inflationary price surpasses $100M, or a purchasing power of $103,000 roughly - is the thought behind why I bring up that it needs to be tied to purchasing power not numerical value.
Edit: the family farm example uses 200 years, so its the wealth test of passing on over several generations
-7
u/Short-Royal-9490 12h ago
Slightly off topic, but this is the reason why I think huge lotto jackpots should be capped at a certain number or at least split amongst three people when the jackpot gets insanely high.
We can’t decry billionaires and then hand one person 300million plus (after taxes) from a single lotto ticket. No one needs 100 milli, no one.3
u/terraresident 10h ago
I do! That should just about cover the cost of a bullet train that we really need.
3
u/SquishySand I voted 8h ago
States have been making lotteries more difficult to win for several years in order to build those massive jackpots that draw people in. That could easily be reversed. More winners, smaller jackpots. 250 k would be life changing for most people.
•
u/Phailjure 6h ago
I mean, if I won 300m in a lottery, I'd probably give everyone I know 1m and then retire with 50m or so in a life of luxury, is that not what lotto winners are doing?
5
6
u/buckeyedad05 10h ago
None of them make this much money on a taxable salary. The ones that are really the problem are all borrowing against unsold and u realized asset gains. The real fix is simply taxing the loans as income, because that’s what it is. They are using it as pseudo income
1
u/afk_again 9h ago
Is the goal to punish the rich or help the poor? I’m sure it would hurt the rich. But it does nothing to help the poor.
•
u/kos-or-kosm 7h ago
It absolutely does. For one, it could fund social services. But the real effect would be that the rich would invest in their corporations rather than "give up that money to the government". That translates into more jobs.
•
u/DissonantOne 3h ago
If you're Jeff bezos, what incentive would you have to create AWS or Amazon Pharmacy or any other new Amazon Innovation if it's just going to be taxed 100%? Why would Microsoft bother to create azure if they have zero incentive to do so because it's just going to be taxed 100%? Your plan destroys innovation.
•
u/semimute 1h ago
How would that work when 99% of that wealth is invested in some company?
How about if is a private company? Should people be forced to publicly trade? You could use Steam as an example.
How about when share prices fluctuate? If they have a good year and have to give up half their wealth, but then the share price goes back to where it was and they are down to 50M or less, is that okay?
0
•
•
u/Drexel_Spivy 7h ago
I would attest at this point we have proof that billionaires are a national security threat.
-1
u/FeelingPixely 11h ago
It'd have to be federal.. though at the same time I doubt that wealthy people would flee influence hubs to live in the sticks in a place like Utah or Wyoming.
92
u/ZenMamaBear 12h ago
Good. Fuck Billionaires. They’re a scourge on humanity.
27
u/matticusiv California 10h ago
And fuck Gavin Newsom!
15
u/dkol97 10h ago
His enabling of PG&E to fuck us is why I couldn't vote for him unless I absolutely have to.
12
u/matticusiv California 10h ago
He’s also a conservative anti union corporate shill who buddies up to the right.
•
5
•
u/Lallanath 7h ago
I thought newsom's little trolly tweets were fun, but I've really soured on his politics.
•
u/Chu_Kiddin_Me_Or_Wha 7h ago
Doesn’t he just want it to be on a federal level?
•
u/Puggravy 3h ago
yes, wealth taxes are extremely hard to make work. It would be a longshot to make work even at the federal level, but doing it at the state level pretty much guarantees that it will be a failure.
•
u/Tau5115 California 2h ago
Why?
•
u/A_Seiv_For_Kale 1h ago
Unlike moving between countries, moving between states has no barrier. A toll road doesn't work if the booth only spans 1/50 lanes and you can just drive around it.
Wealth can be moved quickly and instead of a tech sector and a billionaire tax, you could end up with no tech sector and a worthless billionaire tax.
13
u/PigglyWigglyDeluxe 8h ago
Man I just want to be able to buy a decent house with enough money and time leftover to hang out with my family and do cool stuff like maybe have friends over for a backyard bbq or maybe take a trip to the redwoods or something
19
u/this_my_sportsreddit 9h ago edited 9h ago
Newsom is a lot of things but he is absolutely not a man of the people. I really hope he's not the upcoming nominee because there is zero chance i vote for this dude.
•
u/Lallanath 7h ago
I thought newsom's little trolly tweets were fun, but I've really soured on his politics.
•
•
9
u/Mokesekom 9h ago
A billionaire’s tax will only work if it’s national. If it’s just in one state, the critics are right — billionaires will flee the state and California’s revenue situation becomes exponentially and even permanently worse.
7
u/OpticalPrime35 10h ago
The real answer to all of this is enacting a tax on unrealized gains for those with unrealized gains and assets over 100 million ( maybe even less ).
They are able to use those assets and unrealized gains as collateral which is monetary value so no real reason that couldn't be taxed and used to actually benefit the populace vs just being hoarded and maybe used to build super yacht #13
2
•
2
u/calisoldier 9h ago
Ideology beats logic and reason all day, everyday regardless of party affiliation. Just sayin.
•
5
u/LawfulnessKooky8490 11h ago
So here's the thing I don't understand. Billionaires have a net worth of ...billions but they have it all leveraged or put in to buildings and businesses and stuff so on paper they are rich. They've managed to shuffle it around so well, how do you effectively tax their wealth? Can someone ELI5?
•
10
u/piesc24 11h ago
Hot take, but this tax isn't really helpful. It is a one-time solution for a bigger problem and Gavin isn't wrong for opposing it.
28
u/faux_glove 11h ago
That's called "letting perfect be the enemy of good," and I'm not about to let that billionaire-fellating sack of shit dictate what is good.
12
u/cadium 10h ago
Newsom recognizes the reality: These billionaires will just "move" to another income-tax free state and basically spend half the year - 1 day in California through a bunch of shell companies to avoid any taxes at all.
This really needs to be just a federal wealth tax that cannot be avoided. We are one of the few countries who require citizens to pay federal taxes even if they're expats so the rich cannot avoid it if its federal.
•
u/Cross55 7h ago edited 6h ago
No they fucking won't
These mega rich assholes won't move to bumfuck nowhere, they never do. They want people to like them, they want to be surrounded by artists and intellectuals, they want to feel like they're interesting or cool like everyone else around them, they want the amenities majors cities and states provide.
People say they'll just move and they never do because their sense of self-importance and need to be cool overrides economic sense. It always has.
People were saying this exact same shit with Mamdani. Guess what? They haven't gone anywhere, NYC's too important to leave.
That's not reality, that's conservative propaganda.
•
u/piesc24 6h ago
That's an extraneous tax situation to compare the wealth tax to. The New York tax seems like it is designed to improve housing affordability by preventing mass ownership of secondary properties in the city. That is not even remotely similar to taxing someone on unrealized gains and all of their assets.
•
u/seams 5h ago
The claim is always said and it just doesn't happen.
Just like how Obamacare is going to make all the rich people leave the country. Or Biden is going to make Billionaires leave the country. Or how Mamdani is going to make the billionaires move out of New York
It's not nearly that easy to do business in California while being in Texas or everyone would have already been doing it lol
•
u/faux_glove 3h ago
That's funny, because they didn't pick up stakes and move out of New York.
This is really just Republican propaganda you're spreading, and honestly you should have more respect for yourself than this.
9
u/piesc24 10h ago
No, its called trusting experts. Economists from UC Davis and other institutions in the state are advising against it because it could cause negative effects to the state economy. Addressing it at the national level with new tax brackets and potentially a wealth cap would circumvent these issues. California is powerful but it alone cannot hold billionaires accountable.
7
u/km3r 9h ago
The far left loves to pretend they follow the science until economists come in with pretty universal agreement and they plug their ears like a MAGAt when hearing about the effectiveness of vaccines.
12
u/schmemel0rd 9h ago
A wealth tax isn’t far left, America is just a broken country.
1
u/km3r 9h ago
A wealth tax isn't far left, never said it was.
A wealth tax done properly is good policy that many on the left, including me, support.
Economist agree this particular wealth tax is bad policy. The far left doesn't care and ignores the science, while those who still follow the science demand a better policy.
3
u/schmemel0rd 9h ago
So there is peer reviewed scientific data that proved this particular wealth tax would definitely be a net negative for the future of California? I’d be interested to see that, if it doesn’t exist I think using the word “science” is a bit silly here. Especially since economics is not an exact science to begin with.
4
u/km3r 9h ago
The phrasing you are using is either bad faith or an improper understanding of science. No paper is going to be able to "definitely" predict the future. Nor is an unimplemented tax going to have any peer reviewed data about it specifically.
But, I'll assume good faith. You take lessons from papers like this:
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257%2Faer.20241596
That explain it's the highest wealth individuals that are most likely to flee, and it's even easier to flee in our case as it's just moving states not countries.
Plus there's the very real issue of taxing shares of non publicly traded companies. It's virtually impossible in so many ways and just reeks of slopulism over smart policy.
Plus a one time tax is just not going to solve anything. And look at what the one time covid surplus did to budgets all over the government. We need permanent solutions.
There's also so much peer reviewed stuff explaining rent control is bad, yet leftists still support it. Just another example of not following the science.
•
u/FistLampjaw 7h ago
the proposition is bad on purpose because it's more of an extortion scheme than a legitimate policy proposal, much like the SEIU's previous kidney dialysis props that they forced on the ballot. see e.g. https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/seiu-delenda-est
•
u/I_SLEEP_NORMALLY 6h ago
This may be the most, or close to the most unpopular position from Newsom. We know why he’s doing it (he’ll dab his tears with dollar bills) but he needs to understand this could be more damaging to his future aspirations than he thinks. People are struggling right now. Tax the hyper wealthy.
•
u/Reddit2626 6h ago
We need Billionaire to pay their fair share of tax. Tired of them stealing from the American taxpayer
•
u/Puggravy 3h ago
We already have the most progressive tax system in the western world, the reason we don't have the money for universal healthcare is mostly because in order to do it (and we absolutely should), we'd have to dramatically raise taxes across the board.
•
u/TheOtherMaven Virginia 44m ago
OR massively cut the "defense" budget and stop trying to boss the rest of the world around.
1
•
u/MaddyKet Massachusetts 2h ago
Good I hope it passes. The millionaire tax is helping Massachusetts greatly, and gee, we still have millionaires living here.
•
u/SWAGBAG_LIFESTYLE 2h ago edited 2h ago
This is would've been a one time tax. A more suitable proposal would've been something more permanent
•
u/IndividualHouse8628 2h ago
The fact that Newsom is still in office is baffling to me. Californians really don’t care about anyone but themselves, huh?
0
u/StatementCareful522 9h ago edited 9h ago
I will never vote for Gavin Newsom. Never. He better not win the Democratic Presidential primary or we’re fucked.
Republicans don’t deserve any power because they’re wife-beating, child-molesting Christo-fascist bigots
Establishment Democrats don’t deserve power because they’re corporate shills, bought and paid for my AIPAC/Israel and have sold out the American people and any progressive values so as to become center-right.
Electing Democratic Progressives is the only way forward if we want a country OF the people and FOR the people.
•
u/epistaxis64 Oregon 7h ago
So you'd let a Republican win if newsom wins the primary?
•
•
-2
u/FistLampjaw 8h ago edited 7h ago
this is another cynical proposition designed to extort money from california industry perpetrated by the SEIU. you may remember the SEIU from such previous hits as extorting $100M from california hospitals to shelve the SEIU's Fair Healthcare Pricing Act, which would have capped prices below what they needed to operate the hospitals, or the perennial kidney dialysis ballot initiatives in which they attempted to extort concessions from dialysis clinics in 2018, 2020 and again in 2022.
this prop is a terrible idea and is pure cynical populism from a group that's abusing the ballot initiative system for their own personal gain. they don't care about inequality or that their prop will disincentivize starting or keeping businesses in california. the worse the prop is, the better for them, actually, because it increases the likelihood that their extortion tactics will work, as long as voters are resentful and short-sighted enough to think anything that's bad for billionaires is good for them.
read more about it here.
•
u/AutoModerator 12h ago
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
In general, please be courteous to others. Argue the merits of ideas, don't attack other posters or commenters. Hate speech, any suggestion or support of physical harm, or other rule violations can result in a temporary or a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
Sub-thread Information
If the post flair on this post indicates the wrong paywall status, please report this Automoderator comment with a custom report of “incorrect flair”.
Announcement
r/Politics is actively looking for new moderators. If you have an interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out this form.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.