Late Stage Capitalism

3411 readers

623 users here now

A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.

A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.

RULES:

1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.

2 No Trolling

3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.

4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.

5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.

6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc. This includes instance shaming.

Introduction to Socialism (external links)

Wiki

Marxism-Leninism Study Guide: Advanced Course

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

anticolonialist@lemmy.world

K1nsey6@lemmy.world

185

Newsom urges a national ‘billionaires’ tax’ while fighting one in California (apnews.com)

submitted 3 days ago by FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world to c/latestagecapitalism@lemmy.world

28 comments fedilink hide all child comments

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who is considering a run for president as he approaches the end of his term, called for a national “billionaires’ tax” on Friday even as he fights another proposal targeting the wealthy in his home state.

Newsom also said the U.S. government should own a stake in artificial intelligence companies. His proposals, outlined in a Substack post, aligns him with the Democratic Party’s populist left, and he argued that urgent changes are needed to prevent the elite concentration of wealth and power from undermining democracy.

“It’s time for an economic reset for America,” Newsom wrote.

The governor announced his agenda a day after an influential health care union in California pledged to go forward with a ballot measure that would impose a one-time 5% tax on the assets of billionaires living in the state as of Jan. 1, 2026.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

“Wealth is movable, and it shops for the state with the lowest taxes. The fight belongs at the federal level, where this broken system was created in the first place.”

Newsom said the solution is a new national tax policy, rather than a state-by-state system. He proposed a minimum tax on anyone with a net worth above $100 million. He also wants to make it illegal for the wealthy to borrow against their stock portfolios to fund their luxury lifestyles tax free.

Newsom said there should be new rules for inheritance taxes, warning that “the transfer of wealth among the ultra-wealthy will lock in a permanent American aristocracy of inherited wealth.”

[–] Asafum@lemmy.world 43 points 3 days ago

He also wants to make it illegal for the wealthy to borrow against their stock portfolios to fund their luxury lifestyles tax free.

This shit right here needs to go. Obviously everything else there would be great too, but fuck these people for already being stupidly wealthy and then having this tax free loophole while we all get taxed on our incomes...

[–] makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world 25 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Newsome is a slime ball but he's not wrong here. There's a reason thousands of corporations are registered in one random building in Delaware. Likewise there's US Senators who don't even live/vote in the state they're supposed to represent. A national tax is a much better option than individual states. It's really easy to avoid the consequences of living in a specific state if you're rich

That being said, there's no fucking chance that's going to happen any time in the near future. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. If there's anywhere that has a chance of wringing some money out of the ultra-wealthy California is the place to do it

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 6 points 3 days ago

I don't see why you can't have both. Both the Feds and the States should impose a 20% tax on all estates over $100 million.

The states that don't impose a wealth tax will get all the rich people moving there, and the States will come to regret it greatly. Everything will be unaffordable, everybody will be suing each other, and workers won't be able to afford to work or live there.

Meanwhile, the states with a proper tax balance will be affordable, and livable.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's questionable whether he's sincere, but this is at least a coherent position, that wealth taxes can only be effectively done where you can impose meaningful costs on avoiding them.