Note well: I said "obvious", not "easy" or even "politically possible". But I think it's useful to note that, in important ways, California is doing this to itself.
When it's put in an ideologically biased way that ignores practical solutions to paying taxes on an increasing property value, it implies another ideologically biased solution that favours the material interests of the rich...
I'm arguing against hiding your ideological motive (lower taxes) under the guise of 'logical deduction' or 'obviousness'.
Note that AnimalMuppet was also downvoted for the same reasons.
See this thread:
Lots of right-wing arguments upvoted with almost no evidence:
> [The city] grant[s] de facto immunity to homeless people committing petty crime, stop all police enforcement of drug laws, and shame everyone who dares to complain.
This isn't an argument, and has no sources other than a vague 'feeling' by the poster. It even includes a bit of a cut at the left ("shame anyone who dares to complain").
I'm not really complaining about that individual comment, but it's also upvoted and contains no argument or substantive discussion. Similar comments I've made are always deeply downvoted.
This has a chilling effect on discourse from leftists, where it feels like it's not worthwhile to write a substantive comment only to have it downvoted with nothing other than pithy right-libertarian ideological comments in return.
So I haven't really bothered with this account, hence spewing ideology.
> So I haven't really bothered with this account, hence spewing ideology.
You just told us to ignore anything you say.