Episode
SEIU Delenda Est
- Podcast
- Astral Codex Ten Podcast
- Published
- Apr 17, 2026
- Duration seconds
- 831
- Processing state
not_requested- Canonical source
- https://sscpodcast.libsyn.com/seiu-delenda-est
Actions
POST https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/astral-codex-ten-podcast-226483/episodes/seiu-delenda-est/transcription-requests
Idempotently request low-priority transcript generation for this episode.GET https://stenobird.com/podcast/astral-codex-ten-podcast-226483/seiu-delenda-est.md
Read the agent-friendly Markdown representation of this episode resource.
Summary
California lets interest groups propose measures for the state ballot. Anyone who gathers enough signatures (currently 874,641) can put their hare-brained plans before voters during the next election year. This year, the big story is the 2026 Billionaire Tax Act, a 5% wealth tax on California's billionaires. Your views on this will mostly be shaped by whether or not you like taxing the rich, but opponents have argued that it's an especially poorly written proposal: It includes a tax on "unrealized gains", like a founder's share of a private company which hasn't been sold yet. This could be an existential threat to the Silicon Valley model of building startups that are worth billions on paper before their founders see any cash. Since most billionaires keep most of their wealth in stocks, any wealth tax will need some way to reach these (cf. complaints about the "buy, borrow, die" strategy for avoiding taxation). But there are better ways to do this (for example, taxing at liquidation and treating death as a virtual liquidation event), other wealth tax proposals have included these, and the California proposal doesn't. It appears to value company stakes by voting rights rather than ownership, so a typical founder who maintains control of their company despite dilution might see themselves taxed for more than they have. Garry Tan explains the math here with reference to Google. However, Current Affairs has a good article (?!) that pushes back, saying the proposal exempts public companies like Google. Although private companies would still be affected, this would be so obviously unfair that founders would easily win an exemption based on a provision allowing them to appeal nonsensical results. Still, some might counterobject that proposed legislation is generally supposed…