From: fedora@fea.st   
      
   On Sun, 22 Feb 2026 12:43:08 -0500, Wilson    
   wrote:   
      
   >On 2/22/2026 11:33 AM, Julian wrote:   
   >> On 22/02/2026 16:13, Wilson wrote:   
   >>> On 2/21/2026 6:40 PM, Julian wrote:   
   >>>> On 21/02/2026 16:56, Wilson wrote:   
   >>>>> On 2/21/2026 2:28 AM, dart200 wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 2/20/26 11:53 AM, Dude wrote:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> 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   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> So how much property, income & sales tax do the billionaires pay to   
   >>>>> the bottomless state budget pit that's Kalifornia?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I guess at some point, on this trajectory, some shareholders might be   
   >>>> moved to sue companies that don't relocate from Kalifornia for   
   >>>> breaching their fiduciary duty to maximise returns on investment?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> In the UK publicly listed companies are legally obliged to maximise   
   >>>> profit... which is why, for instance, they are frantically   
   >>>> unravelling their DIE extraordinary popular delusions and the madness   
   >>>> of crowds.   
   >>>   
   >>> If a big wealth tax is implemented the techbros who stay will either   
   >>> be forced to liquidate a large percentage of their assets driving down   
   >>> the value of the stock, or give that stock directly to the taxing   
   >>> agency making the State the owner of a part of those companies.   
   >>>   
   >>> Guess which of those two the politicians will want?   
   >>   
   >> If they can't confiscate have the stock, people's property,   
   >> they won't think twice about trashing the asset values in   
   >> millions of people's pension funds just out of spite.   
   >   
   >Good point. Envy drives a lot of this.   
      
   You flatter yourself.   
   --   
   Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain   
   Don't get political with me young man   
   or I'll tie you to a railroad track and   
   <<>> to <<>>   
   Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?   
   dares: Ned   
   does not dare: Julian  shrinks in horror and warns others away   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)