California’s loony “wealth tax” is set to appear on the 2026 ballot. Many view it as one of the most absurd ideas in taxation history, supported by individuals who have zero understanding of economics. Of course, that doesn’t mean a significant number of lefty voters won’t support it. Jealousy is a powerful emotion, and the Domestic Terrorist Party uses it to the fullest extent to get what they want.
But now that the measure is on the ballot, Gov. Hair Gel is panicking. In a frantic tone, Gavin Newsom is advising residents to vote “no” on this measure and is explaining his reasons for opposing it:
California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is facing another blow after a massive wealth tax he warned could cause a wealth and business exodus from the state was officially added to the November ballot.
Despite his opposition, the measure’s sponsor, Billionaire Tax Now, announced Thursday that it was officially being added to the state’s ballot. The measure, called the California Billionaire Tax Act, would impose a one-time, “emergency” 5% tax on Californians with assets exceeding $1 billion. The tax has been endorsed by socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who called it “reasonable and necessary” “at a time of unprecedented and growing wealth consolidation and income inequality.”
However, Newsom, a rumored frontrunner for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, has come out strongly against the tax, citing fears that billionaires will simply up and leave to states like Texas or Florida.
Yeah, Gav, it’s kinda late for you to be worried about that now. This is been a big part of the Great Sorting, and let’s be clear, it’s only going to get worse in deep blue dung holes like California, New York, and New Jersey – all of which seem to be moving on from simply electing ‘liberals’ to electing even farther-left socialists and commies.
Newsom went on to explain, though, that he’s okay with a nationwide billionaire’s tax, perhaps thinking that billionaires don’t have anywhere else to pack up and go live:
So here is what I support: A national billionaires’ tax. A true minimum tax on billionaires — a modern Buffett Rule — that ensures the people at the very top pay at least the tax rate their own workers pay. Today, the office worker can shoulder a higher tax rate than the heiress. The construction worker could pay a higher rate than the developer. And the delivery driver can end up paying a higher rate than the founder of the company whose packages he delivers.
This is the same nonsensical, asinine BS every lefty/commie uses: ‘Oh, the office worker pays more than the billionaire in taxes!’ Number one, that is simply false. The top 10 percent of earners in America pay more than 90 percent of the income taxes. And there’s also this: Wealthy Americans who own businesses employ other Americans. They also pay Social Security and Medicare taxes on those workers. They are very much contributing to the wealth and productivity of our society.
Also, there’s a difference between paying taxes on liquid wealth – that is, money you currently make – and ‘net worth.’ The latter is a fluid figure that changes daily; making people pay taxes on ‘net worth’ is nothing short of theft. And our founders were against that.
The bottom line is this: If you take away incentives to continue owning and running businesses – like punishing them for their success with excessive taxes – and they’ll take their ball and go home. That is what happens in every single socialist economy. Ditto for Communist economies. History proves it time and time again.
Finally, there is this: None of these ‘billionaire taxes’ can happen without a constitutional amendment.
First, Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, the Enumeration or Apportionment Clause, says in part:
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers…
“Direct taxes” means taxes levied directly on citizens. Then, Article I, Section 9, Clause 4, the Direct Tax Clause, says:
No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
Now, here’s the good part. We already have a tax that is not laid in “proportion to the Census or enumeration.” It’s called the “income tax,” and it took passing and then ratifying the 16th Amendment to get around those other two constitutional provisions:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Governor Newsom’s proposed wealth tax would necessitate a constitutional amendment. Such an amendment requires ratification by three-quarters of the states, which amounts to 38 states—making it essentially impossible.
Dear Governor Newsom: I suggest you take some time to read not just economics texts—if I could recommend one, it would be Dr. Thomas Sowell’s “Basic Economics”—but you should also consider reading the Constitution, which you swore an oath to uphold. After all, a little bit of knowledge can go a long way, especially when you’re starting from a position of very limited understanding.
