| ▲ | mlmonkey 11 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
I don't understand the point of a "one time" tax. What happens once the money runs out a year later? Another "one time" tax?? Why not implement a permanent tax if you want to permanently solve the problem?? | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | silverFork 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
If they are blocking the one time tax, would they allow for a perma one. Don't be naive. No matter what type of tax it is, they will throw money to keep the status quo. $100M is chomp change to him and he can deduct it most likely. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> don't understand the point of a "one time" tax It's basically to send a message to a group of people that they should fuck off. There is a reasonable gamut of opinions about whether this is valid. But I think it's fair to say Californians are upset about billionaires, and that this is a coherent way to message that opposition. (Similar to the dumbfuck states messaging around wokeness or whatever. A narrowing minority of America is prosperity first.) | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||