11 Comments
User's avatar
THOMAS M. COLE JD's avatar

A wealth tax is obviously a bad idea. And so is a property tax, which inordinately impinges on the middle classes who depend on their homes for shelter and wealth creation. As my friend Greg Hammel has pointed out recently, the wealthy classes wealth, when combined is only a few trillion. But the middle classes combined wealth is around $180T. So we will be the target for sure if the labor unions and democrats in general get their way.

Daniel  Cerf's avatar

Preaching to the Choir on this one. How do you tax a person unearned income?

How is this article going to get into the hands of those who see green coming there with this maybe windfall? But little do they know this will not be a one and done program.

I would support a Ca tax reform that took into account corporate and personal taxes and put together a flat tax with graduated brackets. Get rid of all the loop holes and fancy deductions.

If Ca is the forth largest economy in the world why not leverage this tremendous advantage and make it the third largest, instead of driving our industry and workers and our billionaires to tax free states that are beating us on so many levels.

Stephen Russell's avatar

The everyone gets Taxed plan from Dems. Thanks Newsome & allies

NO on 40

Lowtech's avatar

One of the glories of the United States is that the states compete with one another. Helps to keep their nuttiest ideas in check.

Tom Willard's avatar

IMO this is one reason Newsome wants a national wealth tax. Obviously he's against this odious tax in CA since most will exit. But if it's a national tax, where will they go? Plus, he won't be blamed for it. Is there any politician more two-faced and power hungry than our Gov? Probably but.......????

LT's avatar
20mEdited

A Wealth Tax would be yet another self imposed assault to the economy. Why do our leaders make life so difficult, I thought they were elected to do the opposite! Does anyone actually believe Billionaires will not pull up stakes and just take off?

The proposed Billionaire Tax is really a Millionaire Tax in disguise. Does anyone believe it will only affect Billionaires? Maybe a more accurate term would be “Baby Boomer Tax.” It sure seems that the gig is up for the Dems running the State, and this tax stunt is merely a way to raise much needed revenue for their ongoing bankrupt scams.

What is needed in addition to electing Steve Hilton, is a grass roots Tax Payer Revolt, just as Howard Jarvis did years ago. Seniors need tax relief now! Property taxes, gas tax, income taxes, all need to be on the ballot.

Mark Cavanaugh's avatar

We have a civil war coming between tax and spend government(s), public employees and the left wing politicians vs. business and the tax paying public. Taxing wealth is a loser as are the highest tax rates on income, fuel, etc., in the country, but the fundamental questions are (1); What are we getting for the high tax rates we are already paying for today?, and (2); where is the money planned to be spent by the proponents of this outrageous wealth tax? The answers are, (1), nothing and at great cost, and (2); further bloating of social programs (e.g., DEI, education administration, public universities whose administrations have run far off the rails encumbering students with debt that will never be repaid in return for degrees with no economic value to the real world, overpaid government employees doing worthless tasks regulating businesses to death, etc.) while rocket fueling the already huge unfunded pension liabilities for all these worthless, no value added, public employees. Oh, and of course a bunch of public employees will be needed to administrate this shakedown program and nothing will be spent on infrastructure. The tipping point is rapidly drawing near. Vote NO on this ridiculous proposition and then take a chainsaw to drastically reduce our current government(s).

CarsAreBasic's avatar

As stated before.

Taxes are paid by customers - cost of doing business. Prop. 40 is a joke

Tommy Birk's avatar

Can’t wait to see how they force liquidation of assets; then a loss is occurred, do they get to write-off losses against gains? I think not!

John Doe's avatar

Unregulated capitalism leads to exploitation, no one but the wealthy benefit from it.

During the Gilded Age, working class people ate less than what peasants in Europe did following the bubonic plague. The "golden age of capitalism" that followed the Second World War saw a mixed economy, not a laissez Faire system and the wealthy paid more in taxes than, than they do now

Scott Wenz's avatar

not worth the effort