@mattyglesias the problem is that you wrong about the most consequential stuff - money print go burr, biden re-election support, afghanistan withdrawal (given how it turned out), way back with iraq war. who cares if you bat singles in 9-3 games, when striking out in the 9 in close came.
@bobbyfijan the loss of 6 (out of 214) billionaires moving does not depend on it passing. there is no threat of rest moving out due to this tax, because moving will not save them from it. the current $26 billion estimated lost will all that is ever lost from the tax.
@bobbyfijan it is already too late for Zuck to avoid the tax if it passes. if you didn't move in 2025, you are subject to the tax even if you move now. if it passes and he moves, he will still face this scenario.
@TheStalwart what does relocate mean? just changing hq address and some executives. the most valuable employees that keep it running are not leaving the bay area. a real relocation would decimate meta's critical workforce.
@bobbyfijan Isn't the fact he can spend so much money on this an argument for the tax? The whole premise of the argument against - it will drive the super rich out - hasn't happened. Only six of California's 214 billionaires have left.
@michaelbd This is dumb. 1. When have the nuclear powers not communicated? 2. Nuclear powers do not get to decide another country's future without the participation of that country. The US and Russia don't get to make an agreement and then impose it on Ukraine.
@mattyglesias Well SCAG determines the housing need for each so cal city. HCD sets regional target. SCAG allocates for city. If you liked that Santa Monica's RHND 5x-ed, that was SCAG. Real question - why is a non-governmental, unaccountable agency telling cities the housing they need?
@TaupeAvenger but it is not, because it is money ALREADY spent. the state cannot just decide not to pay or pay what they want. there is no way to reduce it short of the state declaring bankruptcy. if something is underfunded that is definitionally not 'well funded.'
@LinkofSunshine but the impacts are very real and need to be paid for. new housing is not impact free. why should existing residents subsidize developer profit and new homeowner housing prices?
@TaupeAvenger but that is still not well funded. this is not 'spending.' these are debt obligations. paying is not in any way discretionary. if you think you can just cut to make up for this, provide your numbers.
@signulll the entire millenial world was created this way. only elder millenials ever experienced a real recession. the bulk never experienced a recession in their professional lives. I think Millenials are especially ill suited for the coming challenges.
@GoodGuyGuaranty it used to have a pretty prominent music scene - bad brains, minor threat, fugazi. henry rollins and dave grohl started out in this scene.
@bobbyfijan where? that's the key question for all housing policy. all pro housing polling is read with the unspoken caveat of (but not near me). of course, if you build away from big cities you will produce far more homes with that trillion (probably with lower prices).