Sergey Brin Confronted Gavin Newsom

(bloomberg.com)

35 points | by arunsivadasan 4 hours ago

8 comments

  • mitchbob 3 hours ago
  • moneycantbuy 3 hours ago
    endless greed is remarkable. guys with $200B can't afford to pay taxes to the state that allowed them to gain such excessive wealth in the first place, often via government subsidy. this cancerous version of capitalism can't end quickly enough.
    • kelseyfrog 3 hours ago
      If we don't allow them to hold us hostage they will all leave.
    • VirusNewbie 1 hour ago
      I think your sentiment is a good example of massive propaganda people fall for. The wealth tax in question would tax Sergey roughly 50 billion the first year as it is written now.

      HE would have to sell his ownership of Google almost immediately. This isn't about paying taxes this is about forcing owners of companies to liquidate almost entirely.

      • wbronitsky 23 minutes ago
        Sergei Brin is worth around $230b. The tax seeks around 5% of that, which is $11.5b. I don’t see how, when most of his net worth is in Alphabet stock, he would have to sell anything but trivial amounts of his ownership of the company to fund this. The tax is also one time, so saying things like “the first year” is extremely misleading. It seems to me like the real propaganda is your post.
        • ashwindharne 2 minutes ago
          I believe it's calculated based on voting equity, of which Sergey owns significantly more than 230b.
      • HaloZero 51 minutes ago
        How did you come up with 50 billion? It’s a 2% one time tax no?
      • bdangubic 20 minutes ago
        the math is not mathing today
  • clutter55561 2 hours ago
    That is pretty sad. People would rather spend money on political activism instead of supporting their home state.

    Imagine if they said instead - no need for tax, here is 15 billion to fund the schools.

    They could be heroes but choose to be assholes.

    • VirusNewbie 1 hour ago
      California's budget is 350 billion a year. Why didn't THEY fund schools?

      Why do you support politicians who fund the high speed rail? They could have funded the 15 billion for schools easily in that budget.

  • jiveturkey 3 hours ago
    so much at stake here, such an understated headline. i'm surprised this is bloomberg.
  • TacticalCoder 2 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • Arodex 1 hour ago
      Well, why didn't Texas/Alabama/Florida/Tennessee didn't get those companies created in their states? Why aren't these Free-Market-Maxxing states just good at getting them decades after their creation - attracting them via tax dumping - and don't create them?
    • roughly 2 hours ago
      Do you know the history of why California became a tech mecca?
      • ecshafer 1 hour ago
        Because of the Federal government heavily investing in Computer research at the Universities there and propping up the semiconductor industry?
    • sifar 1 hour ago
      You could flip it around. These companies wouldn't exist without California. The state had the conditions where these companies could germinate and thrive. Elsewhere they might, they might not.

      In an alternate reality Mr Brin could still be a billionaire owner of a company not based in CA and he would still have to face this issue or he may not.

      But we are here and question is why they don't think it is ok to pay these taxes. It is interesting to see their actions. There is some double think here - they want to cut ties and move out, yet want to influence the state. A sibling comment rightly said - they could be heroes by spending money that would be just a drop in the bucket for them, but instead choose to do this - still spend that money. The old adage seems true, you didn't become rich by doing that.

      Now I understand one may not be happy the way the state allocates the funds - but that is a different discussion.

    • waterTanuki 56 minutes ago
      I find it funny how bad faith commenters immediately reach for the "COMMUNISM" bugle the microsecond any tax increase for the ultra-wealthy is proposed.

      Taxes on the highest income bracket during Dwight D. Eisenhower's presidency where 90%.

      90%.

      Ya know, during the 1950s. The so called "Golden Years" of the USA. Fiercely anti-communist, Cold War going on.

      And here we were taxing the richest at 90%.

      That's how I know your comment is in bad faith.

  • ece 3 hours ago
    Thankfully CA has a form of direct democracy that billionaire assholes cannot stop.
    • polski-g 3 hours ago
      They can leave. And they did.
      • csb6 2 hours ago
        I am skeptical billionaires will actually leave their mansions in Malibu or Santa Barbara in any significant numbers just because of higher taxes they can easily afford to pay.
      • ece 2 hours ago
        Apparently they didn't go very far.
        • cyanydeez 2 hours ago
          most billionaires behave just like users on social media: they want to be on top, collect the most karma, etc. They arn't leaving a platform as large as California because that means diminishing their power and influence and attention.
          • add-sub-mul-div 1 hour ago
            Threats to leave for Texas don't survive the realization that then you'd have to live in Texas.
            • jbindel 1 hour ago
              Exactly. Texas is horrible please stay out. It’s a briar patch. lol
      • bdangubic 2 hours ago
        shows you also how “smart” they are to “live” in Cali in the first place. you got billions, park yourself wherever the F you don’t have to pay jacksht for being a billionaire prick and get yourselves on of them houses in Cali to actually live instead of whatever shthole houses billionaires for free
        • adjejmxbdjdn 2 hours ago
          Except what’s stupid is thinking the marginal billions of dollars they may save by not paying CA taxes are worth anything.

          If you have $5Bn, other than power for power’s sake, it’s very hard to see how the next $100 or $500Bn can actually improve your life and happiness.

          OTOH, being able to watch a Broadway show that you may have missed because you didn’t live in the same city, or a drive along the ocean while there was a beautiful sunset, would have significantly greater value to the quality of your life.

          • bdangubic 15 minutes ago
            when you have this money you can “live” anywhere you want. he can have breakfast in Paris and still make the Broadway show and also get AirBnB for like a year in SF and then also like basically be wherever you want to be regardless of where your “mailing address” is. I have a friend who is 7-digit rich that lives in SF (for the past 8 years) but “lives” in Florida. sounds like our billionaires can’t figure this out so it makes the news (in the middle of about 857 other more important things going on)
        • VirusNewbie 1 hour ago
          Wealthy people pay the vast majority of taxes in California. Meanwhile, at least 20% of the population are complete freeloaders.
          • bdangubic 13 minutes ago
            billionaire adorers remind me of this…

            “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires”

  • CrimsonRain 3 hours ago