• CosmoNova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 months ago

      It almost looks like it‘s designed to fail. Probably all of those billionaires will be richer by the end of the year this tax comes into effect. Meanwhile the money raised from it won‘t be enough to solve all that many issues. It‘s not really supposed to but billionaires and their outlets will keep telling us how „taxing the rich was tried and failed!!!“ Mark my words.

    • Waterpumpee@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      I was going to answer how taxing income instead of assets is more effective because it emphasizes reinvesting and creating jobs. But billionaires shouldnt exist. Its just too much accumulated in one person.

      • pdxfed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        The problem with the “reinvestment” thesis is that the US and certainly not California, aren’t some fledgling economies struggling to develop and grow–wealth is so unhealthily concentrated it leads to those with outsized portion of the gains investing in things for the sake of investing rather than actually doing anything good for the economy(let alone nation) long term.

        Billionaires have wealth managers and investment teams throwing money at returns regardless of externalities, tax minimization, lobbying…they aren’t putting money into anything “real” that anyone on main street or any other street would benefit from.

        5% one time seems so poorly thought out it was designed to be voted down by those who want real change (permanent, ongoing), which is anyone not in the 1%

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Everything is statewide when the billionaires own the federal governing apparatus, sadly.

        Our only power is local.