Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan launches dark-money group to influence CA politics

Post by f30e3dfed1c9 » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 2:30 AM UTC

chr1 wrote: post #104

Analemma_ wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hell no, California has this and it’s a catastrophe. Prop 13 is one of the worst policies enacted by a democratic polity in the 20th century, and has been wrecking the state for decades.

Why do you think that similar law could not be passed without direct vote? The problem is not direct democracy but the fact that it is being done in a wrong way. Voting should be done without anonymity, online. One should be able to either vote for everything manually, or delegate the vote to any other person. If some change is supported by 100% of the voters it should be implemented immediately. But if smaller perce…

Post by johnnyanmac » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 2:33 AM UTC

kadabra9 wrote: post #272

johnnyanmac wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You could confiscate 100% of the wealth of every billionaire in this country and it wouldn’t fund the government for an entire year. 1. I see that being 14 trillion. That would in fact fund the government for a year. even for 2 years. 2. taxes aren't about achieving perfect equality. But it's in part to incentivize people to not hoard wealth and spend it in the company. Few of the busnesses in the 50's/60's paid clo…

Except is not 14 trillion (in the US) It is closer to 8 trillion. Even if it WAS 14 trillion, the fact that such an insane measure wouldn’t even fully fund the entire government for two years shows you can’t just confiscate your way out of things. It is spending.

Post by bdangubic » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 2:50 AM UTC

kadabra9 wrote: post #277

bdangubic wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> property, company stock, any unrealized gains in different equities, etc. it is only “unrealized” when they have to pay taxes. but walk into a bank and ask for a loan (which is of course what they do) and all of a sudden that shit is all “realized” and here’s millions of dollars to ya…

That’s a separate discussion. I think there should be some sort of tax penalty to borrowing against assets as a sort of infinite money glitch.

Post by kadabra9 » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 3:05 AM UTC

bdangubic wrote: post #285

kadabra9 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a separate discussion. I think there should be some sort of tax penalty to borrowing against assets as a sort of infinite money glitch.

it is not separate, it is exactly the same discussion. if you currently can use “unrealized” shit to borrow against than it is perfectly fair for you to pay the taxes on that shit. it is absolutely not a “separate discussion”

Post by johnnyanmac » Thu, Feb 12, 2026, 3:14 AM UTC

kadabra9 wrote: post #286

johnnyanmac wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>to have to go through the administrative burden of valuing all that, and then attempting to liquidate at some reasonable market value just to pay one time levy (allegedly lol) is insane, and will rightfully be challenged in court Cool, let's do it. We know the IRS, especially when auditing the rich tend to be one of the highest value employees of government they will sue no matter how cut and clear the tax code is a…

Of course its easy for you to say - its simple to just point the finger and claim you're entitled to your "fair share" of someone else's property simply because they have more than you. And my main point isn't even that "its hard" (which it is), its that governments cannot simply just tax and confiscate their way to a utopia. Fortunately for sanity and common sense, this proposal, if it even passes, will surely be ch…