The constant texts/calls, emails and ads everywhere are really trying to prevent this proposition from passing. What do y'all think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Taxing wealth has two benefits - first is more to spend on the budget, but another is reducing inequality. It's weird, but our world would be better off if all personal holdings over a billion just vanished into smoke.

Wealth (if just dropped into S&P) has been going up by double digit %s in 10 of the last 13 years. 10% of a billion is 100million USD in growth just for the talent of 'having money'. It's a runaway train and we need to have a mechanism to limit the concentration before it's too late.

Pro-tip: it might already be

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    The second order effect is the value, especially for a much bigger wealth tax.

    If we pulled a few hundred billion out of Larry Ellison, Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos's pocketbooks, we could buy the Air Force twelve or thirteen screws.

    But more importantly, we've cut the mikes from their stack of financial amplifiers. They can't command the attention of government far beyond their position as individual horrible men anymore. Their particular vision for a futuristic hellscape has to compete in the market of ideas. They can't afford national big-brand media or to surround themselves with phalanxes of lawyers.

    This social benefit doesn't show up on a flat spreadsheet, and it's willfully ignored by analysis that stops with "the money dries up."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 month ago

    Thank goodness we have mechanisms like the 2nd amendment if it is too late right? Oh wait, it's illegal to form a self organized militia in California because.... Black panthers were too scary for the white boomers 😂😂

  • source
  • parent