2 ms·
Ah, I misunderstood then. I thought the benefit would go to the companies, while the individual people would still suffer. That's how it normally goes in this
by crankylinuxuser 8y ago
Ah, I misunderstood then. I thought the benefit would go to the companies, while the individual people would still suffer.
That's how it normally goes in this country, so you can probably understand why I was confused.
- Kalium 8y agoI can certainly see why you might think that! As for the way it normally goes, both real flesh people and non-people people generally pay taxes on the value of their real property. Which strikes me as, on the whole, reasonably fair and equitable. California has decided that nobody should have to, provided they've had that real property long enough. The change going to voters would leave real flesh people exempt(-ish). On the one hand, having corporations pay actual taxes will help state and local governments uncouple their budgets from the stock market some. On the other hand, there's already a problem where cities are incentivized to permit offices over housing, and this seems likely to make that worse...