this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2026
270 points (95.9% liked)

Technology

88209 readers
3824 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 16 points 22 hours ago

They didnt flee the billionaire tax.

They fled to other countries to avoid their epstein ties and to keep raping kids.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 59 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Taxes are how to get rid of billionaires. Tax the rich!

[–] kingkong@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

sure i dont mind but rather do land value tax and all of them should have to pay 50% tax as if they liquidated their holdings then at the time of leaving and market value of all assets.

like most wealth tax that is. income tax based then. 5% isnt even much remove income tax instead

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 4 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

A tax aimed at their worth would help

[–] kingkong@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

thing is the closest easiest tax to implement that would target the elite networth is the land value tax not wealth tax because they cannot move land. it literally is right there cannot be hidden. they may argue about the value but they cannot escape. its the least bad tax as well. but homeowners keep on complaining like little girls that boomers cant pay for it except boomers have already been bailed out by 2-3 generations already they stole futures from and now they still complain whine moan while voting for nimby policies they are literally destroying multiple generations putting them and us all into slavery for their own gain because they are the most spoiled brat generation to have ever walked the earth.

so sick of it. just tax them until they all go bankrupt. 20% lvt will cover income tax and sales tax for the whole country

[–] johntash@eviltoast.org 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Not disagreeing, but how would that work?

Most of their worth isn't going to be liquid so you'd have to take some sort of average for the year and force them to sell assets?

I guess it could be something like RMDs if above a certain threshold?

[–] kingkong@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

excuse me most of their worth isn't going to be liquid because they made it illiquid by design and every incentive to pump their own assets we are asking for real valuation if they want to avoid taxation. meaning the stock market housing market all bubbles will be much more muted if they dont wanna pay the taxes. the whole reason for the extreme bubbles in housing is precisely for the buy hold die strategy while paying almost no taxes and instead use the borrowed money to buy up everything and enslave multiple generations with borrowed money off hot air balloon money.

either they can sell covered calls on their own stock sell their stock or dividends. or they can take out loans on the stock or take out loans on their house or rent it out for extra income i dont care they have millions and billions in value so go tap it and pay the tax if you dont wanna pay as much tax lower the valuation or extract value from it to pay the tax no one cares.

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

No no just tax the rich, no convoluted scheme they can avoid.

[–] FireWire400@lemmy.world 124 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Hadriscus@jlai.lu 34 points 1 day ago (2 children)

How many billions will he even have left ??.? I can't imagine,... poor mr Jensen's wallet

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 9 points 1 day ago

enough to buy more jackets still.

[–] FireWire400@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Unrelated, but I'm sure he's got the tackiest wallet imaginable. Maybe crocodile leather or something.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago (1 children)

When are they going to write an article about me for also doing this normal thing?

[–] gergolippai@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

that would be a perfect onion or mcsweeneys premise :)

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 71 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

take his leather jackets next

[–] username_1@discuss.tchncs.de 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

G.Threepwood: I sell these fine leather jackets...

[–] Rujo@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Grog, grog, grog!

[–] deeprlyeh@lemmus.org 29 points 1 day ago (2 children)

So they just went somewhere else to not pay taxes?

[–] Cherries@lemmy.world 56 points 1 day ago (1 children)

These folks don't actually wanna leave. Peter Thiel will blow a lot of smoke about how he's totally gonna leave California because of Communisim or whatever, but there's a couple things to keep in mind.

  1. The billionaires are spending mad money to fight this tax. This is not the action of someone who plans to leave the state.

  2. The infrastructure that makes the billionaires rich cannot be moved from California easily. A person is easy to move, a warehouse less so. Those assets can be taxed, even if the owner leaves the state.

  3. Fuck these guys. Billionaires do not contribute to the economy; they suck out the wealth and hoard it. Even in the worst case scenario of rich folks leaving the state with their ill gotten gains, the state wasn't gonna get that money anyways The worst case scenario for California of the mythical "Wealth Flight" is a bunch of parasites moving elsewhere.

These parasites have had it too good for too long. A measly little one time tax is a step in the right direction that I hope opens the door to more aggressive taxation on these dregs of society.

[–] original_charles@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah. Texas usually. Maybe another Red State.

[–] deeprlyeh@lemmus.org 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Thiel went to Nazi land, Argentina.

[–] PancakesCantKillMe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)
[–] CluelessCalls@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

That piece of shit ought to be moved to the bottom of the ocean.

[–] woelkchen@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

He doesn't want others to think he's as poor as those guys who cannot afford to pay these taxes.

Edit: typo

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Didn't know all 3 had or planned to move.

I wonder how many would have to move before the tax actually becomes revenue negative (compared to not being implemented.)

[–] boaratio@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm sure they didn't actually move. They just bought a house in another state and declared it as their primary residence.

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yes and then the audit will be entertaining. If they have multiple properties and fuck up, they could easily maintain residence.

And whatever their residence is, if they do things that look like working while physically present in the state, they are at risk of being forced to pay.

[–] Sprocketfree@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Could be the only good use for flock. We now can show they've been in the state the whole time.

[–] 5too@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago

Sadly, they don't seem to me to be the type to drive from state to state

[–] jerakor@startrek.website 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The average tax income from billionaires in california looks to be around 10million a year. So combined the about 200 billionaires in california are paying 2 billion a year. Rough numbers would be that is 150 of them left then the one time tax would start being a negative income in 10 years. That assumes money stays flat.

Honestly there is no way that this ends up being a serious net negative and these folks are still operating in California enough that they may fail to avoid residency review.

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca 2 points 1 day ago

Estimates seem to vary but I've found a good few at 3 billion total from the wealthiest 200 Californians.

Also, given the article noted that:

Departing billionaires slashed projected one-time revenue from $100 billion to $40 billion, with Page and Brin's exits alone costing California $26.7 billion.

That implies the current tax revenue from billionaires would drop 60 or so percent. So, presumably tax revenue drops from 3 to 1.2 billion, just based on current flights (and ignoring knock on effects.)

So, no one else leaves and we don't count knock on effects, I'd guess it'd take ~ 21 or so years before this starts cutting. But, of course, knock on effects (folks decamp to say, Texas which seems to be snagging as many once Californian businesses as possible...) It's going to be a very interesting, depressing experiment. (Really feels like a race to the bottom but that's the America we know and,uhhh, love?)

[–] kingkong@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

avg income tax from billlionaires 10 m a year ONLY thats so absurdly low and 200 billionaires paying 2 b a year is like 1% of their billions? holy fuk we need to increase the taxes.

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 4 points 1 day ago

Bye, Felicia

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The guy depends on Trumps goodwill, and Trump would punish him if he ditched the tax.