• Doomsider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    You mean this rich well connected individual isn’t going to burn their friends. You don’t say!

  • TronBronson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    That man is the definition of afflueza, which I hear is only cured by Luigi fever or something idk all the weird media labels confuse me

  • whereitsat@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    a guy who looks like a sleazy wall street exec, car salesman or television producer doesn’t want to tax rich people???

    i never would have guessed!!!

    at his best he still looks like an aging patrick bateman.

    a big difference between 30+ years ago and now is that the lizards can’t hide their tails; clinton and bush looked like normal american men; this dude just walked out of the bourgeoisie salon and has likely memorized his stylist and publicists cell numbers but probably can’t remember the name of his sons/daughters.

  • nonentity@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.

    Corporations are the only ‘persons’ which should be subjected to capital punishment, but trillionaires should be forced to transition into billionaires, and billionaires should be euthanised through taxation.

    • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      the problem is that American evangelicalism has tied money and goodness together with the prosperity gospel.

      The more money you have, the more gooderer you are, and all you have to do is give all your money to (church/fund/whatever target) and god will give it back to you three-fold!

      and there for, being against money by wanting to tax people means you are big evilsatanbad.

  • quick_snail@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    Fuck newsom in general, but I could see a rational argument that the tax should be national to prevent billionaire Californias from moving to the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe.

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Mamdani proved unequivocally that they won’t actually move. Stop giving in to the bullshit billionaires are spouting to try to stop themselves being taxed.

      Also, who fucking cares if they leave? Billionaires are a burden to the society and economy of any city or state they live in.

      And yes, FUCK NEWSOM! Say it loud and say it proud. NO MORE CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS!!!

    • matlag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      And if he’s president, he will say he can’t enact the tax because billionaires would flee the US.

      We’ve had the same arguments in France. The economist who proposed the tax actually used data from the US to show that few rich people actually leave the place they’re in, because that’s where they live, meet people for business or pleasure, etc.

      This could be evaluated for California too.

  • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    No way, really?

    The guy who changed laws for his rich friends is against his rich friends having to pay comparatively insignificant sum that wont hurt their dragon hordes or its infinite growth in any significant fashion?

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      It’s worse, this is Nixon and the EPA all over again.

      Or Obamacare even.

      They know it’s unavoidable, and if they don’t act something effective might finally happen.

      So the oligarchs will pass something that says “tax billionaires” but absolutely no one will fall under it. When a progressive runs on “tax billionaires” everyone will point to this do nothing bill and say it’s already done.

      Taking the wind out of the movements sails…

      I’d like to say this shit should be obvious, but it’s clearly not for most people.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        I’d like to say this shit should be obvious, but it’s clearly not for most people.

        Its almost as if decades of attacking education and critical thought was the first step in destroying our democracy or something.

          • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            1969 people didnt have the total sum of human knowledge and infinite possibilities towards personal improvement and learning in their pocket.

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 days ago

              Yeah, but they said 1909 people didn’t have national TV news…

              Not to mention the Internet only tells you someone noticed something, another way to look at that is they had more critical thinking than we do today, because they had to fill in the blanks themselves.

              It’s insane how many times I’ve out time into a comment pulling form multiple different areas, and someone’s just says “source” without any context. And a single link that looks like it backs one thing up, is taken as proof for everything.

              Just the concept that someone is putting things together is inconceivable to people, that expect one single article that “proves” everything.

              It’s really fucking dangerous when a society blindly accepts authority like that, even without a demented fascist running the show.

  • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    He was married to Kimberly Guilfoyle, who was Don, Jr.'s concubine for a long time. They’re all peas in the same pod. He’s a Manchurian MAGA.

  • BigMacHole@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    What do you MEAN he DOESNT want to? He SAID he did and that’s WAY MORE PROOF then him LITERALLY trying to BLOCK Legislation in his State to Tax Billionaires!

    • artyom@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      He wants to tax them at the national level. Taxing them at the state level accomplishes nothing except running them out of the state.

      • frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        Not to harp on here, but the other comments didn’t talk as much about the billionaires/corporations fleeing the state part that you brought up.

        Realistically, most companies are not leaving California in general because they lose access to one of the biggest economies globally if they do. These companies print money hand over fist for the board of directors and owners.

        Many companies will just eat whatever tax since if they leave the state, they lose marketshare and revenue. If the owners themselves leave the state, they’re still paying taxes on what’s generated in the state.

          • frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 days ago

            The people. People makeup an economy and are the primary driving force. Also the cashflow of those people. If big businesses want to make more money then they will want to be doing business with Californians.

            • artyom@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              TIL people only exist in California and also can’t do business with California outside of California.

              • frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 days ago

                My guy, let’s drop the snark for a minute here if we’re having a dialogue. You know we’re talking about Californians and business in California.

                Not everyone lives in California, but based on the context of the conversation of California’s economy, then businesses doing business with Californians are subject to California law and California taxes. If Amazon wants to sell to people in California then they have to play ball by California’s rules for instance.

                • artyom@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  You know we’re talking about Californians and business in California.

                  I honestly don’t know what you’re talking about, sorry. Some vague mention of “people” and nothing to do with the California economy or why billionaires can’t engage with it from outside of California.

                  Amazon wants to sell to people in California then they have to play ball by California’s rules for instance.

                  We’re not discussing Amazon or any other company, we’re discussing billionaires. Bozos can easily move his primary residence to Texas or Colorado and pay his taxes accordingly, and Amazon can continue doing 100% of the things they’re already doing.

          • EldritchFemininity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 days ago

            People and businesses located in California buy goods and services, and produce goods and services that are sold both in the local region and abroad. This exchange of goods and services is frequently called an “economy”.

            The economic activity within the state of California would make it the 4th largest economy in the world if it were an independent country, and it is the largest subregional economy in the world.

  • danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 days ago

    A statewide billionaire tax is stupid. All it will do is chase rich people out of your state. It only makes sense as a nationwide bill.

    • tomselleck@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      If this wasn’t California, I might somewhat agree with your statement. These people aren’t going anywhere, because the California coast is obscenely beautiful. Some might leave, but the majority will stay since the tax will end up just being a tiny inconvenience for their level of wealth.

      • danc4498@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        I live in a red state and have met tons of people they left California tor tax purposes. I guarantee the state will lose money from doing this.

        • tomselleck@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 days ago

          California loses more people each year than live in the entire state of Wyoming, and that’s normal. If you know people that moved states for lower taxes, then I doubt they are billionaires. Why are you, someone who lives outside of California, so invested in a proposed law for a place you don’t live? I don’t live there either, but I don’t care about where billionaires live. I’m just pointing out that it’s mostly empty threats. Remember when Mamdani passed a tax on secondary residences and people threatened to leave? Guess what happened.

          • danc4498@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 days ago

            I think people on here like to shit all over Newsom for BS reasons. This headline is a great example. He’s against a statewide wealth tax, which makes sense for the reasons I gave. We can agree to disagree, that’s fine.

            But has he come on against nationwide wealth tax? I don’t think so. I don’t honestly know what he stands for (which is a legitimate complaint).

              • danc4498@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                He didn’t support Ben Shapiro. I’ve listened to all his controversial podcast and found them very enlightening. I would rather listen to a Democrat interview these people that suck than listen to them on Joe Rogan, or anything like that.

                Covering your eyes and ears to these people is exactly how we got 4 more years of Trump.