Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason) header
Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason) profile picture

Product manager, D&D nerd, former economist, tech bard, future talk show host. Building myself in public. I love connecting interesting people and ideas. DM me!

San Francisco, CA
Joined August 2008
Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)Photo by Daniel Thomason (@danieljthomason)
It's not your fault, but it is your problem.
3
290
Welp looks like we're eating a 24% increase in our SF rent next year, nice one
1
48
Daniel Thomason retweeted
this California wealth tax thing is just incredible. so in October 2025, a California healthcare union proposed a "one time" 5% tax on any billionaire's wealth. the ballot measure will be voted on next month. In early December 2025, California announced that it would be a retroactive tax if passed, applying to anyone with CA residency as of Jan 1, 2026. The objective is to pay for Medi-Cal, California's incredibly dysfunctional healthcare system. (which also functions as a glorified welfare apparatus, but that's a discussion for another time). polls reveal that the CA electorate is split around 50/50 on the tax, but prediction markets only give Prop 40 a ~23% chance of passing (there are competing measures on the ballet that would nullify it). there are 200 billionaires in CA, worth collectively somewhere between $2.3 and $2.6 trillion. 5% of that is around $100b, accounting for a small amount of attrition. proponents of the tax forecasted a significant windfall, assuming only a 10% departure rate. supporters thought they were being clever with the retroactive concept. no billionares would leave CA in the few short months between the tax being proposed and the residency cutoff date, without the tax even having passed yet, right? well as it turns out, they did. a new paper [1] from two academics at Stanford called "The Net Present Value of the California Billionaire Tax Act", argues that not only did more billionaires leave due to the proposed tax than its proponents expected, but that the value of the tax, if it does pass, is actually negative. proponents of the tax only assumed 10% avoidance, that is, only 10% of the taxable base of targeted billionaires would leave CA within the very short Oct-Dec 2025 window. Jaros and Rauh, the Stanford academics, find that a lower bound of 28.6% of the taxable base managed to leave. just based on known departures, those departures total $577b in net worth, or $28.8b in potential tax lost. this of course does not capture everyone (many left without announcing their departure), so the authors normalize to departure rates estimated from other wealth tax events, and apply other discounts for litigation, arriving arrive at a figure of only $28-$36b in forecasted tax revenues. but this isn't all! all of the income taxes paid by the departed billionaires are also forsaken. the authors estimate that CA billionaires pay $3.3- 5.8b in annual income taxes. they assume a midpoint of $2b lost in annual collections from departed billionaires. the net present value of that lost income stream is -$68.9 billion. so when you add it all up you get: + $30b one-time tax windfall (estimated) - $69b in present value of lost future income taxes = - 38.9b overall net present value of the tax of course, this analysis is highly estimate driven. the authors simulate the parameters 100k times and find a negative NPV of the implemented tax 85 percent of the time. and if the tax doesn't pass, which it's not looking like it will, California still ended up losing at least $577b in departed net worth, and they have permanently poisoned the well with entrepreneurs who will now worry about future wealth taxes. [1]: nber.org/system/files/workin…
494
1,383
392
11,973
1,400,645
Replying to @solve_sf
@solve_sf I noticed something interesting about the city's SLOs. I submitted the report below about damaged pavement, and within 24 hours someone had come out to inspect – great! But it's now more than a month later and... it's still not fixed.
2
69
Hypothesis: there are plenty of first-line staff to respond to reports, and a (probably massive) shortage of actual maintenance staff who can do the repair work.
1
18
Oh also, I said "city SLOs" in the first tweet but I don't know if those even exist. Surely they should!
19
Daniel Thomason retweeted
ever wondered why you can't find housing in sf? i made a game where you try to build some. every site is a real project and every law is real. see how far you get.
79
327
77
3,545
244,537
Daniel Thomason retweeted
I used to think ideally you’d never numb. Now that seems stupid. Like never taking on debt. Sometimes you must, not doing it is living on hard/impossible mode. You just need good debt (numbness) management and to invest the loan wisely so you can pay back principal + interest.
You aren't addicted TO scrolling/ vaping/ overworking, you're addicted to anesthesia. This is why your attempts to curb addictions require so much willpower
12
17
2
376
9,433
I mean, the ugly answer to this is obvious to anyone who has worked at a big company: search is sooooo far from being a priority that no-one talented wants to touch it. Would take a good, smart team maybe a year to fix it, but smart people don't *volunteer* to fix dumpster fires.
5 trillion dollar company
2
5
154
@patio11 I channeled your spirit while writing this; interested to hear if you agree with my take or if I'm off the mark
1
24
- You need a system where the maximizers can extract a lot of value in a way that ends up net zero or slightly negative for you but only after going to sufficient effort that most users won't bother - (caveat to that point: AI may break this)
1
22
- And then for normal users you need a system that is easy to understand – it shouldn't take more than a sentence to explain - Bilt Cash breaks this too - So summary: I see what you were going for with Bilt Cash but it's not a winner in its current form
20
Replying to @HeyBilt
@HeyBilt some feedback on the product: - The core concept is killer – you're still the only game in town for housing + CC - The Palladium card is genuinely a contender for premium spend, but: - Bilt Cash is hard to understand and the caps make it annoying/useless for power users
1
108
- I think you still haven't nailed the line between reward-gaming users and normal users - The former are still valuable customers to you because of social proof, but you're alienating them right now with the Bilt Cash caps
1
18
Don't play a game you think you should be playing, play a game you are actually equipped to win (or at least do well at)! Hint: the 'should' is the part that suggests you're on the wrong track
Guys...this applies to anything that's highly competitive. During high school I was told repeatedly that I could do anything I wanted to do. So I decided I wanted to be an Army Ranger. When I got to West Point I realized that becoming an army ranger would in fact require me to be a totally different person than I actually was. Could I have maybe willpowered my way into the ranger regiment? Probably. Would I have thrived or been successful there? Almost certainly not. Not everyone has the chops to be a quant. Or a trader, or an I-banker, or an army ranger. The qualities and talents you need are usually innate and not things that can be forced. You either have the juice or you don't. Play to your strengths. Figure out who you really are, and then lean into that heavily. Otherwise you're just fooling yourself.
1
110
The final act in the Boomers-trampling-Millennials drama promises to be the most epic of all: inexorably rising demand for capital is going to enrich retirees (net savers) massively at the expense of young families (net borrowers). Fun times ahead!
1
1
100
Sticking with the 'shaped my brain in a meaningful way' interpretation rather than just 'favorite games' (thus only 7)
1
1
122
Side note: I uploaded the list to Gemini and asked for its interpretation, and got some pretty good psychological insights!
11
Story time. Here are some photos of graffiti I cleaned fifteen years ago. Someone had tagged nearly every sign on the backroads in my little village and I didn’t like it. I was struggling at the time with hopelessness at the state of the world, wondering constantly what impact one person could have against all the degradation, the pain, the problems. So I did something odd. I left one sign tagged. I cleaned all but one. The sign I did not clean is still tagged today. No one else has cleaned it. No town worker, no municipal road crew, no green up day volunteer. Fifteen years. I keep that sign as a reminder; if YOU do not step up and do something about the problems you see, nothing will change. The cavalry ain’t coming. It’s up to you.
438
2,551
255
26,002
860,396
Daniel Thomason retweeted
A good example of revealed v. stated preference:
3
98
1,670
25,599
Daniel Thomason retweeted
I resigned from Anthropic today. I spent the last three years doing pretraining research at both OpenAI and Anthropic. Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. More thoughts below.
20,467
167,012
39,445
800,614
175,449,301
wait what, I thought there were like 9 Redwall novels and that was it?!?! does this mean that I just aged out of awareness that they were being released?
ORPHANS OF MOSSFLOWER, the 23rd and final Redwall novel, will be published in September 2027! Read more: redwall.fandom.com/wiki/User…
1
277
I mean sure, but German doesn't distinguish between venomous and poisonous which seems like a much bigger semantic gap...
Sorry but I just learned that english has no word to distinguish between normal bones and fish bones like german does and I am beyond appalled and disgusted. Can we patch that please??
1
120