isn't that the main gist of the no argument?
Because they can SOME DAY LATER change the prop 40 rate to affect regular folks with 2/3 support of both houses and I suppose the gov's sig.
So, if 40 fails the state can never raise taxes? Because the permission structure is gone to raise taxes. Unless it is unconstitutional, I don't know what the state can't do if it has 2/3 support of both houses.
I suppose the sub argument is that 40 creates an infrastructure to tax wealth at a lower amount than 1 billion, but it doesn't apply to this tax today. And you can ask AI this question, if your wealth is 1 billion and 10 dollars, you owe only fifty cents (5%) because it is the wealth over 1 billion dollars.
I'm getting a feeling that the people against prop 40 basically believe in top-down economics. I could be wrong but that's what it feels like. It's not the dollar amount because if you have 2 billion in wealth the tax is 5% of 1 billion or 50 million.
Yes on 40