216
How brave to insist one something he can't deliver until after he is voted in as pres. I'd be more inclined to believe him if he actually supported the CA wealth tax
What an absolute fucking snake. He's been opposing the billionaires tax in Cali and now he wants to say it should be national where there is no chance of passage?
Fuck this guy.
Perfect democrat performative politics bullshit. It's on the ballot in CA and he fought it the whole time lol
Take the L Gavin
I understand it not being a CA only issue. It is a national issue.
It is much easier for billionaires to move their money from state to state that out of the country.
Musk abandoned CA because TX will give him everything he wants and never tax him. The US desperately needs wealth taxation and more progressive property taxation.
The US desperately needs wealth taxation and more progressive property taxation.
It's really hard to make a progressive property tax that won't be gamed by slumlords.
A UBI makes all flat taxes progressive,. To deal with the other end, adjust the tax code so any time any increase in value is used it needs to be taxed as regular income.
Californians are proposing a billionaire tax and he promised to veto it.
Also, we don't want a stake in AI. We want to burn it to the fucking ground because it's ruining everything right now.
Newsom is such a duplicitous motherfucker.
I believe, and this is as diplomatic as I care to be, that he is perhaps concerned with billionaires fleeing the state and that a national approach could prevent that.
On the other hand it is more likely that his resistance to the CA tax and cheerleading of a national approach is purely performative as it will simply not happen at that scale, so that his pseudo-progressive veneer isn’t stripped away.
"I can't tax billionaires in California, because they'd leave California"
"I can't tax billionaires nationally, because they'd leave the nation"
"I can't tax billionaires globally, because they'd leave the planet"
There will never be a finish line in front of which these billionaire-class guardians won't shuffle their feet, nor a goalpost that they won't carry further. It's some real "I'll release my taxes after I get elected" energy.
On the other hand it is more likely that his resistance to the CA tax and cheerleading of a national approach is purely performative as it will simply not happen at that scale
I think that's more likely
That's really pretty standard Democrat fake leftist strategy - only openly advocate for a leftist proposal when there's no chance that it'll pass.
that he is perhaps concerned with billionaires fleeing the state
If they are not paying taxes anyway, why would that even matter?
It’s not that they are providing $0 in tax income, it’s that it’s nearly 0%. It’s still a chunk of change.
I’ve heard that we wouldn’t feel the impact for 25 years.
Even so, kick them out. They can live in beautiful Houston Texas, or sunny Arkansas. Or maybe they will decide paying up is worth the cost of being a resident of California
Except evidence doesn't support mass flight of the rich with higher taxes anyway.
It's all bluster. When you have households and businesses both supported by dozens to hundreds of employees you can't simply sell your house and buy a new one. You'd need all new staff to cater to your needs, would have to get new business licensing and real estate for your businesses to move, there's just a whole lot more than pulling up stakes and moving state when you're a fat ass dragon sitting on a hoard of stolen gold.
he is perhaps concerned with billionaires fleeing the state and that a national approach could prevent that
Not sure about his motivations, but we absolutely cannot be playing states off of one another to see who can bend over the hardest for the Epstein Class.
Fuck that noise.
We don't even need a billionaire's tax for an "economic reset". I mean, we do because it's not healthy for our economy or our political system. But what will happen with a billionaire's tax? The money will just go to the government, which will spend it in arcane ways that the average person has little visibility or voice on.
What we need is an increase to the minimum wage to whatever it would've been if it hadn't been consistently frozen and re-frozen and with mandatory CoLA, universal healthcare, repeal of Citizens United, repeal of whatever decision it was that said a company's ultimate responsibility is to shareholders, a breakup of a whole bunch of overweighted conglomerates, a breakup of media empires, a ban on "entertainment" masquerading as "news", a reform of the Supreme Court, vetc. There's a whole bunch of other stuff as well. But there's a whole bunch of stuff that could get accomplished without a billionaire's tax.
Taxing billionaires would benefit regular people even if the government burned the money. Or buried it. It would reduce the price of assets, like housing, and make them more affordable for regular people.
Sure, it would be better spend the money on healthcare or infrastructure, but even if we just subsidized the underwater basketweaving industry, we would still be better off.
once he become president he is going to champion a world billionaire tax and say no to a national one.
On the other hand it is more likely that his resistance to the CA tax and cheerleading of a national approach is purely performative as it will simply not happen at that scale, so that his pseudo-progressive veneer isn’t stripped away.
The idiots, aka 99%of voters, will only remember him promoting the national billionaire tax.
My thoughts exactly
Yeah, you're not gonna get your credibility with me back, bud.
wasn't this asshole against the billionaire tax in California?
Yes, but then he realized that showing his whole ass before his presidential campaign/election was a bad strategy. He's in damage control mode. If elected, I'm sure he'll flip back to not wanting it again.
"Now is not the time. We have more important matters to focus on"
Gets nothing done regarding any of those matters.
He's an opportunist first and everything else second. Flip flopping is kind of what he does.
He flips flops all the time I only trust his actions which are very much not good.
I don't believe this asshole.
So, think they'll use THE PARLIAMENTARIAN excuse again for this one, if they can't avoid winning congress?
So he’s against the state level one that actually has a chance of passing, but for a national one that has zero chance, neat.
This bowl of fuckwit oatmeal is going to be the DNC nominee for prez, isn't he? We are soooo fucked!
Can someone just nuke us or slam a gigantic meteorite into us? Just end it already, I'm tired of suffering under these fools and mouth-breathers.
Asteroid availability scan complete: one can be hurled your way now, will you be home to sign for delivery in 16 million years?
😂🤷🏻♀️
It's all a smokescreen. He's not proposing a national wealth tax, just another minimum income tax. Which they won't care about because they don't earn significant income.
Newsom said he supports “a true minimum tax on billionaires — a modern Buffett Rule — that ensures the people at the very top pay at least the tax rate their own workers pay.”
He is a 2 faced centrist, family friends with Pelosi. He wont do it.
I don’t want any stake in the future being built by AI because I don’t want the future being built by AI
I think Gaven Newsom should have all of his possessions thrown away.
I think Gavin Newsome should stub both his little toes, one after the other. Daily.
Fine words, but does he have the credibility to back it up?
He does not
Nope while his actions prove he won't actually go for it.
While he fights against any "economic justice" in California, I trust his actions more than talk.
Dude is late to the party. Always is always will. I don’t true him to be true, he’s a reactive clown. Great twitter but he’s too center and that what we are going to see in this, it’s going to be half ass.
this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2026
216 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30195 readers
2368 users here now
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
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS