Isn't Brin a leftie? Meaning he was NOT a supporter of Trump and in fact a pretty staunch supporter $$$$ of Harris?

This is why Newsome can't support this tax. He can't piss guys like Brin off.

-So let them go to a red state and leach off them for a while.

49 other states will roll out the red carpet for them.

Is that because you're smarter than all of them? You've calculated they are leeches? You alone?

Why do you think Newsom is distancing himself from this? Is it only because he needs their support when he runs for the WH or because he really feels it will hurt California if these folks leave?

-Lol guess they will just have to learn the hard way.

So you think they all get it wrong as well?

I guess then notion is that billionaires bring tax revenue and high paying jobs (which is also about tax revenue).

Personally? I could care less about recruiting a billionaire to my state. You'd have to show me what's in it for me and my community.

everyone is conditioned to believe growth and jobs is essential all of the time.

I grew up near a town that saw enormous growth in 1 sector......beef packing.

Brought lots of jobs. But it's nasty and gross and many folks left as a result.

Anything I say beyond this will label me a racist but I can show you what the community looked like before and what it looks like now.

I liked the before.

Oh, and those data centers? ---- those......they are massive water hogs. no thanks.

-Which is mostly just bait and switch

We see the obvious examples of that such as that boondoggle in Wisconsin a few years ago.

But every state recruits employers with incentives on taxes, etc. to lure jobs to their locale.

State, County, City....at all levels they do this.

Interesting....usually folks point to the massive economic engine that California is when we discuss these matters. Their weather, political climate, business climate.....it's all an explanation for why California is such a massive economic engine and why everyone wants to live there and why everything is so expensive there.

Not seeing that here. Now, it's billionaires can go ---- themselves.

Including California billionaires. Billionaires in California were better than Billionaires in a red state.....just because......

LOL

-With no state income tax, they enjoy all the benefits of public expenditures with no responsibility to pay for them.

Is that what you're accusing yourself of? You live in TN, correct?

Are you a leech?

Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming

Most red states have an income tax. Just sayin....

87

but are you "enjoying all the benefits of public expenditures with no responsibility to pay for them" or not?

Or.....tell the whole story. What's Tennessee property tax and sales tax environment?

-72% of all federal income taxes.

I'll steal Danforth's thunder a little here........does that calculation include FICA taxes?

"That speaks to a pretty dang progressive income tax code."

That just tells you no tax code can be progressive enough.

The fairness of it will still be in question. No matter what. Wealth inequality is what it's really about.

-Well, I think getting a trillionaire before eradicating world hunger should be an alarm bell.

1 of those will happen. the other one has zero chance of happening.

-Now it's praised.

I certainly don't view myself as someone who praises such greed and I'm sure you don't view yourself any differently.

This issue is about the reality of even trying to pass such a tax and what can happen.

I'm shocked anybody has committed to anything. In fact, I don't think anybody is going anywhere or at least not for long.

This isn't going to happen. I know, it's easy for me to say...it's not 5% of my net worth on the line.

but ask yourselves this...if your state told you to fork over 5% of your net worth, how would you respond?

-They're exempting my IRAs, my pensions, and my properties?!?

Is this bill in California?

-Newsom doesn't have the minerals to stand up to the people who own him.

LOL......I always love this framing of people in a way you can tolerate rather than just rip the -------- bandaid off and accept it for what it is.

People who support democrats are just as demanding and ruthless as those who support republicans.

You're deciding there is a meaningful difference between being corrupt (a republican who's going to run for president who wouldn't support this) and being spineless (a democrat who's going to run for president who won't support this).

What a waste of energy force feeding such meaningless distinctions.

-Most billionaires won't notice the 5%.

They're paying huge attention to it and it's not even likely to happen.

-Those are part of the proposal, yes.

That's not a reality for billionaires due to how their wealth is represented so it's a nice deflection but let's return to how you'd react to having a State take 5% of your estate while leaving most of your neighbors alone.

116

So you think there is a point to manufacturing a meaningless distinction to make yourself feel better for being a partisan?

There are plenty of good reasons to be a liberal, a democrat, a progressive, etc.......this just isn't one of them.

but I guess you can't make the distinction yourself. Instead, you're obligated to force feed yourself no matter how absurd it is.

-Billionaires own this country and they won't have their authority questioned.

Including those who support democrats? Something tells me you can't square yourself to accept that.

"Both parties are not the same."

Thanks, Capt. Obvious. I already pointed that out and you know that.

But I guess you just can't accept that you're still going to force feed yourself with meaningless distinctions.

The truth is that this issue where Newsom has to come out against this is where folks convince themselves there isn't a difference between the 2 parties when there most certainly are.

But the presence of this massive wealth in our political system diminishes the appearance of such differences.

but let me me clear about this....Gavin Newsom has to distance himself from this kind of bill for the same reason any republican has to. The donors.

The billionaire donor class is the billionaire donor class.

When they commit 7 or 8 or 9 figures to a political cause/candidate....they expect adherence to their wishes in exchange.

Is it possible there is anybody here who's confused about that?

I know there are folks here who pretend to be confused about it....and a couple have raised their hands.

But I'm going to take the high road and assume they're just kidding.

-Difference being Mamdani isn't owned by billionaires, Newsom is.

There are more differences than that. Top of the list is what power Mamdani has to affect the billionaires in NYC. Next would be Mamdani isn't a candidate for anything else outside of NYC.

-Not because they would feel the effect of having 5% less wealth.

True. It's not that the 5% would impact them in any real way.

-So now Newsom is panicking that the hand that feeds him is upset.

panicking? how so? He didn't have anything to do with writing this bill and he's not supporting it.

Does he have his fingerprints on bill somewhere?

132

Admit it...she was hot.

-Now the narrative has changed to him not having enough power to implement his policies.

I suppose that explains a lot of dolts who predicted such mayhem as a result of that election.

Pretty normal election drama.

Kind of like the celebrities who promise to leave if the republican on the ticket wins.

....And then make the same promise the next election.....LOL

"the 1940's wasn't technologically capable of sorting people out quickly."

I would think they made it pretty simple.....if you looked like a ---....you were detained.

145

What?

"If company valued at $6B, the founder would owe 150million.
Of stock he can't even sell, and if the company fails and doesn't go public, he still owes."

Your argument there is that he's simply not liquid enough to pay the tax?

I would like to think that was debated when drafting this bill but then again....not sure how much realism was allowed during those deliberations.

-So during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflict you had no problem locking up Islamists without due process?

Hell, people lost their minds over listening to phone calls without a warrant.

-People should lose their minds over the government listening to private phone calls without a warrant.

I agree the illegality should be addressed