Text-only, no CAPTCHA, no Javascript, no DDoS on blog, no geo-blocking
x="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-04-26/how-google-s-sergey-brin-helped-fuel-a-political-war-in-california"
echo url="$x"|curl -K/dev/stdin \
egrep -o "(type\":\"paragraph)|(type\":\"text\",\"value\":\"[^\"]+)" \
|sed '/Read More:/{N;d;};s/type\":\"paragraph/<p>/;s/.\{22\}//' \
|sed '1s/^/<meta charset=utf-8><meta name=viewport content=width=device-width>/' > 1.htm
firefox ./1.htmHE 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.
From https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/25-0024A1%2...
Section 50303(c)(3)(C) says "For any interests that confer voting or other direct control rights, the percentage of the business entity owned by the taxpayer shall be presumed to be not less than the taxpayer's percentage of the overall voting or other direct control rights."
Section (D) says that the tax applies to earnable profit-percentage even if the prerequisites for said earn haven't occurred.
However, there are a bunch of private unicorns whose founders are subject to the tax even though their ownership is well under $1B.
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.
Why do you support politicians who fund the high speed rail? They could have funded the 15 billion for schools easily in that budget.
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.
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.
"A number of my friends who belong in the very high upper brackets have suggested to me on several occasions of late, that if I am reelected president, they will have to move to some other nation because of high taxes here. Now, I will miss them very much..." (audience breaks into laughter)
It's a manipulative tactic by greedy assholes to cow foolish people into accepting their demands of tax evasion to burden ordinary people.
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.
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires”