AOC's claim that "you can't earn a billion dollars" ignited a direct rebuttal from Y Combinator's Paul Graham, who argues his two decades of evaluating founders proves billionaires create wealth rather than steal it. The debate lands as California confronts a structural deficit of $20–35 billion annually — the result of spending growing 10 points faster than revenue under Newsom — with Democrats split between raising taxes further and fixing the underlying spending problem. Proposals like the Sanders-Khanna 5% wealth tax on unrealized gains face a damning track record: Europe already ran this experiment, lost trillions in fleeing capital, and produced zero of the world's ten largest tech companies.
AOC says you can't earn a billion dollars. Paul Graham, who spent 20 years predicting which founders become billionaires, has the data to prove her wrong.
The state's own nonpartisan analyst says spending outpaced revenue by 10 points. More taxation won't solve the problem.
Sanders and Khanna want to tax money that doesn't exist on assets you can't sell. The only proportionate response was a one-act play.
Asked point-blank why the US dominates tech while Europe stagnates, the Senator pivoted to healthcare and homelessness. The honest answer would destroy his worldview.
California bleeds $20-35 billion a year. Steyer wants to raise taxes. Mahan wants to stop lighting money on fire.
Washington State legislators are building a tax regime so hostile that NBA investors are spooked and founders are planning their exits.
Harvard and MIT trained 21 of the top 50 AI founders. Every one of them flew west to build in SF.
SEIU-UHW's asset seizure tax has already cost the state $16.4 billion per year in lost revenue—and it hasn't even passed yet.
A billionaire spending $27 million attacks a mayor for having tech support. The irony writes itself.
Even Gavin Newsom admits taxing billionaires will backfire. Europe already proved it. Why won't Sacramento listen?