Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 754 posts

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#391

Post by NoRagrets »

dheera wrote: post #384
jelliclesfarm wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is understandable that you want these issues fixed. But do you think those who don’t use these services should be burdened with the cost of fixing them? In Europe, social costs are borne by the middle class to provide a safety net for the middle class. In the USA, we expect the wealthy to provide for all of society. It is highly irrational.

> But do you think those who don’t use these services should be burdened with the cost of fixing them? Yes. In /most/ cases, the wealthy are only wealthy because they have (directly or indirectly) profited from the middle class. The wealthy should be paying a fair share of taxes in return, for upkeep of the public services the middle class use, and which the wealthy are perfectly entitled to also use. The middle clas…

In a capitalist economy, we create Capital. It is capital that funds industry. You can’t take capital and make it spending money.

What do you think the wealthy spend their money on other than ‘basic necessities’? Why would anyone be wealthy and only spend on basic necessities? They spend on luxury. They spend on high living and expensive things.

So there are resorts. And staff that work in resorts. There are sports cars and people who work in those factories and mechanics who specialize in fixing them. There are private planes. And so pilots, stewardess, fancy cheese plates and catering services. If the wealthy aren’t allowed to be wealthy, we won’t have a whole swath of jobs.

If we want a healthy middle class, we should stop guilting the wealthy. We should allow them to spend their millions. It’s their money. Let’s hope and pray that they spend it and spend it well and spend it in all the stupid and obscene and wasteful ways. Because that would create a healthy working middle class.

Just allow CA zillionaires BE zilloinaires and watch the job markets flourish. Equality doesn’t mean everyone is equal, it simply means that everyone in their category is equal to each other. If we had economic equality for all, we’d be Cuba, not CA.

Instead of punishing the wealthy with higher taxes that go into Big Govt’s Maw, if we let them actually spend it...we’d have more circulation of money in the economy. Inequality of wealth occurs because there isn’t enough circulation.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#392

Post by ponker »

GhostVII wrote: post #309

San Francisco's solution to everything seems to be to just keep raising taxes, and throwing money at things which don't work. At some point you have to realize that more money isn't always the solution, you actually have to fix your beurocracy. It's insane to me that the city with so many rich people and incredibly valuable companies is such a mess, your telling me that a small city with an incredibly wealthy populat…

Part of the problem is the rich people don’t use the city services the way they do in New York. City services serve the underclass and the professional class uses private vendors.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#393

Post by cam0 »

xienze wrote: post #375
kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #188

It will work out well fiscally because giant companies will suck it up and pay, but it looks like a bad strategy from a forward-looking point of view. You want to incentivize future growth too, and you want to make sure that 20 years down the line, you have the new FAANGs of the world giving you millions in tax dollars, because history has shown that the largest of companies can eventually die out, and tech is full o…

> What this does is, it collects money from today's FAANGs while disincentivizing future startups from starting here. I think it’s gonna disincentivize FAANGs from making future investments in the city. This is BAAAAD timing for a tax hike like this, coming off tech companies doing a seven month experiment in whole-company WFH, and finding out it’s working pretty well.

Does SF really need investment from FAANGs? SF was a pretty awesome city before the tech boom of the 90's + 00's, and currently none of the FAANGs have a major office presence here... FB in Menlo, Apple in Cupertino, Amazon in Seattle, Netflix in Los Gatos, and Google in MV.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#394

Post by ponker »

rcpt wrote: post #339
GhostVII wrote: post #309

San Francisco's solution to everything seems to be to just keep raising taxes, and throwing money at things which don't work. At some point you have to realize that more money isn't always the solution, you actually have to fix your beurocracy. It's insane to me that the city with so many rich people and incredibly valuable companies is such a mess, your telling me that a small city with an incredibly wealthy populat…

Luckily a San Franciscan figured it all out over one hundred years ago so we don't have to wonder about this: > THE GREAT PROBLEM IS SOLVED. We are able to explain social phenomena that have appalled philanthropists and perplexed statesmen all over the civilized world. We have found the reason why wages constantly tend to a minimum, giving but a bare living, despite increase in productive power: > As productive power…

Most visible in restaurants. They came in and made a dangerous neighborhood a trendy hotspot and then got booted out because VC and law firms outbid them on rent.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#395

Post by rriepe »

primitivesuave wrote: post #369
GhostVII wrote: post #309

San Francisco's solution to everything seems to be to just keep raising taxes, and throwing money at things which don't work. At some point you have to realize that more money isn't always the solution, you actually have to fix your beurocracy. It's insane to me that the city with so many rich people and incredibly valuable companies is such a mess, your telling me that a small city with an incredibly wealthy populat…

I used to live in the Tenderloin in 2013 and it has actually improved a lot since marijuana was legalized and public restrooms added in - back then, there was a guy on every street corner trying to sell you something, and certain alleyways/corners where there was daily cleaning for piles of human waste. It's become much less dangerous but still quite depressing to walk through. I started talking to people living on t…

I'll vote for you. Setting up a welfare magnet for the homeless in one of the most expensive real estate markets in the country is cruelty, not compassion.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#396

Post by WalterBright »

reidjs wrote: post #136
WalterBright wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't need to be 100% sure at all. The whole point of the startup is to get ridiculously rich.

This reminds me of that episode of South Park where they form a band but refuse to play until internet music piracy stops. I doubt that someone talented enough to build that kind of company is going to factor this into their decision to run it from SF.

I suspect a big part of Jeff Bezos relocating to Seattle to start Amazon was Washington does not have a state income tax.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#397

Post by mrits »

rcpt wrote: post #339
GhostVII wrote: post #309

San Francisco's solution to everything seems to be to just keep raising taxes, and throwing money at things which don't work. At some point you have to realize that more money isn't always the solution, you actually have to fix your beurocracy. It's insane to me that the city with so many rich people and incredibly valuable companies is such a mess, your telling me that a small city with an incredibly wealthy populat…

Luckily a San Franciscan figured it all out over one hundred years ago so we don't have to wonder about this: > THE GREAT PROBLEM IS SOLVED. We are able to explain social phenomena that have appalled philanthropists and perplexed statesmen all over the civilized world. We have found the reason why wages constantly tend to a minimum, giving but a bare living, despite increase in productive power: > As productive power…

You can purchase a 5K sqft lot outside of Austin for $2,200 and we still have a growing homeless problem. I'd look more into providing mental health, relocation, and incentives to stay off heavy drugs.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#398

Post by cam0 »

nerfhammer wrote: post #381
jelliclesfarm wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never seen a high density city have low rents. Mumbai, Hong Kong, London, NYC. Is there any factual and proven example of a city that has increased density and housing became affordable and cheaper as a result of more units?

Tokyo

Tokyo is consistently ranked as one of the most expensive cities in the world.

Re: San Francisco voters approve taxes on highly paid CEOs, big businesses

#400

Post by rglullis »

stevehawk wrote: post #198
ljm wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, move some of the obscene wealth away so the residents aren't gentrified out of existence, like they already have been? It won't just be CEOs, it'll be all the software engineers and the like too.

and five years from now i get to hear how it is everyone else's fault that real estate property prices fell in san francisco, which destroyed people's equity and retirement plans.

Not to mention how they will be complaining about the underfunded schools, the lack of investment in infrastructure, social programs, free clinics, "no one is there to help the homeless", etc, etc...

It has been 5 years since France tried and failed to put 75% taxes on the "super rich" and they ended up with less tax revenue than previous years. Those who don't learn History are bound to repeat it...

Post reply on HN