politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
"I reject the tax that can pass, but support the tax that's impossible" is the same thing as being opposed to the tax.
Hell it's not even about the difficulty tiers, it's I oppose the one that falls in my juristiction, I support the one that's above me. Please put me in charge of the country and I'll support it... or raise the same objection just saying it will drive businesses overseas and hold out for a global wealth tax.
That one is much easier to give teeth to though. Any individual or corporation who flees to an international tax haven will be barred from entering the US, doing business in the US, or participating in US markets.
Any assets in the US will be seized, any US protected intellectual property will be made public domain, etc.
How will California enforce theirs?
You see... They can't actually take all that land they own or the entire corporation they own and move all of it.
They don't actually want to leave.
There won't be any flight to enforce against. I guarantee it.
But CA wouldn't have grounds to seize land from a corporation, nor could they garnish corporate profits (particularly ones that are most likely based in Delaware), in order to extract funds from one person. The corporations of billionaires are still owned by shareholders, and again, you are getting into Federal Interstate Commerce laws.
Hell even the personal residences are probably not 'owned' by the Billionaire.
You know California has eminent domain laws... right? That's literally the point of those kind of laws.
They don't have to seize it to enforce the tax, they can seize it for unrelated reasons.
Further, eminent domain was made easier to do via a Supreme Court decision during the Bush admin in 2005.
"Oh well the State has plans for this property, so take a hike. Eminent domain, bitches."
That is definitely not the point of eminent domain laws, and it certainly is not that easy.
Even if California won an eminent domain case like that (which would be extremely unlikely), they'd still have to pay through the nose for the property they took.
You have no business being in this conversation if that's your understanding of ED cases in the US, let alone in California.
Truly one of the most uniformed takes I've ever heard.
My grandparents had their farm taken in California via ED. I can tell you that they didn't pay through the nose back then. Perhaps things have changed, but what they got wasn't even close to going rates.
Land is just an empty lot now, too.
When was this? This is absolutely not the norm today. On the east coast We typically start at 1.2 to 1.5x the appraised value, and go up significantly more based on how much legal fight and public outrage is created.
I've been involved twice in my career (for around 140 properties total), with the backing of the Federal government, the FHWA in both cases in my experience, the land is the property of the state as soon as the papers are filled (referred to as 'quicktake', not something a state government can do without federal authority), but the legal proceedings for the total compensation can go on for 10+ years if you have the money to fight it. Total comp is often 5-20x what the property is worth plus all of the legal fees.
The only way I can possibly think of your grand parents farm being taken without them being more than well compensated, is if it happened under Eisenhower.
Look man, we're at a point where laws obviously don't mean what they're supposed to mean and entire swaths of the fucking country abuse laws to get what they want, citizens be damned.
All I'm suggesting is we play hard ball, too. Why is it that Republicans are allowed BY DEMOCRATS to get away with shit. A replacement for McConnell should have been seated WEEKS AGO and then make the Republicans take them to court about it. But I mean I guess we should just be taking the law as sacred when the people beating us with sticks obviously don't and are using their abuse of the law to get away with beating us with sticks with no consequences. But sure, playing by the rules in a system where the other party isn't is sure to work out! Pro-tip, the rules are made up, the constitution was written by people, it's not some perfect document handed down by fucking God and it's clear that it is fundamentally a broken document by how its bee abused. The rules can change, and we shouldn't be so pussy that we are afraid to change them to fight fascism.
This is a ONE TIME tax and Newsom doesn't even have the balls for that! Just another Democrat rolling over without a fight.
The billionaires will never stop their fight to dominate and control. Every time we give up we're just letting them steamroll us. They will break every law, tell every lie, and propagandize the populace. But sure, we can't do one measly thing to help citizens because the billionaires might get mad and what, fight us in court? Oh no! They own the courts and plenty of us are tired of this shit.
I'm tired of being called a Nazi by Europeans and Canadians because everyone in this country is too pussy to stand up to fascism beyond signs and slogans and doing it alone is a death sentence being shot in the street by ICE.
Who is the uninformed one anyway? The one who recognizes we're in a fascist state, or the one still pretending we can just "trust the system." Your head is in the fucking sand, bro.
A state tax like this has absolutely no teeth. It's ridiculous to think that any Billionaire would stick around and donate 5% of their net worth to California.
Unless California also includes a provision that any Billionaire who's found to have fled this tax will be arrested and charged with something that carries a significant mandatory minimum prison sentence, this law will just be theater.
While they are mentally unwell money hoarders, even by that standard it is a bit ridiculous to uproot your entire life over 5%. Even the wealthy have friends, family, places they like to eat, preferred hooker burial sites, etc... and losing ready access to keep some discretionary income that would leave you checks math still absurdly wealthy is bonkers. That and if they're moving a business it's a whole other can of worms. Yeehaw move to Texas and find out how crooked the state's regulations are and how a majority of people around you are not mentally developed enough to function in society- including maybe the person who cooked your meal or rotated your tires.
I could have sworn that it also included language that applied the tax if they leave the state, too, but even if that's incorrect, who cares? Let them move. The more states that do something like this, the less places they'll have as "safe havens" and if they move out of the country, cool, again, let them. It sends a clear message: If you won't pay your share, we don't want you here.
Once everyone collectively agrees that billionaires should pay their share, there will be nowhere left for them to run. It has to start somewhere.
Republican states will never do that. They Iove billionaire boots. For many of them, being a tax haven is the only thing of benefit they can provide.
Unless we overhaul the Interstate commerce act (an article I power... So unlikely) to limit their ability to do business or ship product to/from/through Blue states, we will lose in Federal Courts every single time.
Good let them go. The businesses don't go with them, you can't take the property or the infrastructure. They leave, they leave it all behind, it gets broken up and sold off, everyone who matter wins
Again, that's not how this works.
California can't just seize corporate assets owned by multiple interested parties in order extract funds from one individual.
That's the whole issue with this toothless law, California can't enforce it. Even if they're able to seize a couple residences, the property in them, some vehicles, etc. There will be decades long court battles over those assets, and they still won't add up to the hundreds of millions of dollars that a multi-billionaire would be responsible for under this tax.
You heard it here folks. Time to give up!
Darn, guess governments can't do anything, may as well not try.