From: user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   On 2/20/26 11:53 AM, Dude wrote:   
   > On 2/19/2026 11:00 PM, dart200 wrote:   
   >> On 2/19/26 1:47 PM, Wilson wrote:   
   >>> On 2/19/2026 4:38 PM, Dude wrote:   
   >>>> On 2/19/2026 12:43 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:   
   >>>>> On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 12:39:03 -0800, Dude  wrote:   
   >>>>>> Critics, argue it could negatively impact working people and that the   
   >>>>>> top 1% already pay nearly half of the state's income taxes.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> And so it is that the labor movement has become thugs and a cabal of   
   >>>>> communist academics.  Nah, you can't fool me with that shit.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>> That's because you have not thought this through. Otherwise, you   
   >>>> would have posted your arguments, pro or con, to this list, instead   
   >>>> of infantile emotional outbursts.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The taxable obligation is wholly detached from a liquidity event!   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Unlike income and capital gains taxes, a wealth tax is entirely   
   >>>> untethered from a liquidity event. “Asset-rich, cash-poor” taxpayers   
   >>>> may be forced to sell assets to meet their tax obligations, risking   
   >>>> destabilizing asset and capital markets.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Also, on a more personal level, consider whether one or both spouses   
   >>>> are California residents, the tax is imposed at a household level,   
   >>>> so a couple with a combined net worth of $1 billion or more is   
   >>>> subject to the tax, whereas two unmarried individuals with just   
   >>>> under $1 billion apiece would not be taxed.   
   >>>   
   >>> Reportedly, some high net worth couples are seriously considering   
   >>> divorce to avoid the proposed Cali billionaire wealth tax.   
   >>   
   >> please let us witness *that* timeline 😂🙏   
   >>   
   > Apparently, you have not thought this through, Nick.   
   >   
   > A 5% California wealth tax on a $1 billion net worth would result in a   
   > $50 million tax liability!   
   >   
   > This proposed one-time tax targets the approximately 246 billionaires in   
   > the state, potentially costing them between $50 million and $13 billion   
   > each, depending on their total wealth.   
   >   
   > Does anyone except the Teamsters Union think this is a good idea?   
      
   i hope they leave   
      
   billionaires don't spend their money in ways that are useful to local   
   economies, and they have a lot retarded ways to not actually pay tax.   
      
   in fact they buy up excess property making it harder for everyone else   
   they leave, so better that they don't try to live here   
      
   --   
   hi, i'm nick! let's end war 🙃   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)