"Pretending to propose his own national solution is clearly a cynical smoke screen to let California billionaires off the hook," argues the Billionaire Tax Now campaign as it seeks to counter "5 tricks" being deployed by Gov. Gavin Newsom and his allies.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I see, so you understand that an economy exists, but not that it has many different interlocking pieces that can be examined in different ways. Let me see if I can break it down for you:
When you spend money at the store, when the store pays its employees, or when it buys goods from other vendors, are all examples of what is often referred to as “economic activity”. This can take many different forms at many different scales, in much the same way that a walk around the block is not considered an international flight.
For example, you go to the store and purchase a head of lettuce to make a salad. The store buys that lettuce from a local vendor who gets it from a local farm. That entire chain of transactions would be considered part of the “local economy”.
The fact that the US buys more than half of its aluminum from Canada would be considered “international economics” as the transactions involved take place between two different countries. In this way, you can examine different economics from as small a scale as you buying eggs from your neighbor who has chickens to the macro-economics of multinational corporations dictating the stupid price of RAM by effectively buying goods that don’t exist with money that doesn’t exist while handing the same 20 dollars back and forth to inflate their stock value to a disgusting degree. Hell, you can even pick out specific sectors, like with the aluminum example: when Trump started his pissing contest with Canada with tariffs, the American car manufacturing industry said that tariffs on aluminum would cause them to shut down plants within 6 weeks.
So when we talk about the economy of California, people are talking about the farms, the restaurants, the businesses that exist in the state. The people who work and live there, and the money that flows between them all. If these companies were to pull out of California, they’d be leaving all of that behind. Even ignoring the idea of the loss of sales, they’d also be losing the experience and skill of the people that they employ in the state, and the “value” of the property that they have there - whether that’s real estate or more logistics based like renting storage for goods or the cost of transportation from a manufacturing facility in a new location.
It’s not exclusive (in the sense that no economy in the U.S. is totally isolated) and companies relocate to Texas frequently. But there is a huge advantage to having physical proximity to the largest customer base in America and the tax credits that you can get for specific items and services.
Also California is one of those American cornerstones of worldwide and domestic mythology. It occupies a conceptual and environmentally appealing aspect of people’s minds and is a highly sought out destination. And Texas really doesn’t have the same sheen to it.
What “economy” are you referring to that’s exclusive to California?
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.
TIL people only exist in California and also can’t do business with California outside of California.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I know what an economy is. I asked what economy is exclusive to California.
What economy is exclusive to the United States?
None. Next question?
I see, so you understand that an economy exists, but not that it has many different interlocking pieces that can be examined in different ways. Let me see if I can break it down for you:
When you spend money at the store, when the store pays its employees, or when it buys goods from other vendors, are all examples of what is often referred to as “economic activity”. This can take many different forms at many different scales, in much the same way that a walk around the block is not considered an international flight.
For example, you go to the store and purchase a head of lettuce to make a salad. The store buys that lettuce from a local vendor who gets it from a local farm. That entire chain of transactions would be considered part of the “local economy”.
The fact that the US buys more than half of its aluminum from Canada would be considered “international economics” as the transactions involved take place between two different countries. In this way, you can examine different economics from as small a scale as you buying eggs from your neighbor who has chickens to the macro-economics of multinational corporations dictating the stupid price of RAM by effectively buying goods that don’t exist with money that doesn’t exist while handing the same 20 dollars back and forth to inflate their stock value to a disgusting degree. Hell, you can even pick out specific sectors, like with the aluminum example: when Trump started his pissing contest with Canada with tariffs, the American car manufacturing industry said that tariffs on aluminum would cause them to shut down plants within 6 weeks.
So when we talk about the economy of California, people are talking about the farms, the restaurants, the businesses that exist in the state. The people who work and live there, and the money that flows between them all. If these companies were to pull out of California, they’d be leaving all of that behind. Even ignoring the idea of the loss of sales, they’d also be losing the experience and skill of the people that they employ in the state, and the “value” of the property that they have there - whether that’s real estate or more logistics based like renting storage for goods or the cost of transportation from a manufacturing facility in a new location.
None of that answered my question. Unless you mean to suggest that billionaires will pay $50M+ for California lettuce.
And I told you. California’s. It’s only like the biggest state economy in the United States.
Being big does not make it exclusive. You can move to Texas and still buy and sell all the things in California.
It’s not exclusive (in the sense that no economy in the U.S. is totally isolated) and companies relocate to Texas frequently. But there is a huge advantage to having physical proximity to the largest customer base in America and the tax credits that you can get for specific items and services.
Also California is one of those American cornerstones of worldwide and domestic mythology. It occupies a conceptual and environmentally appealing aspect of people’s minds and is a highly sought out destination. And Texas really doesn’t have the same sheen to it.