Crucially, moving to another state doesn’t allow one to avoid the tax, since the tax would be owed by billionaires who lived in California at the beginning of 2026. Not 2027 — but beginning of 2026. There is no incentive to move to another state. One cannot avoid the tax by moving. This is one of the main reasons why it was structured as a one-time tax.

Pou chèf gang yo ak manm gang yo k ap kenbe kat konpatriyòt nou yo an otaj ann Ayiti: Mesye nou kidnape yo pa konbatan. Yo se teknisyen nan domèn avyasyon ki fè pati misyon nou ann Ayiti, nan kad yon misyon entènasyonal. Misyon nou an gen sèlman pilòt ak pèsonèl teknik, ki gen kòm travay prensipal fè evakyasyon medikal epi sove lavi moun, pa fè lagè. Men, nou te kidnape yo yon fason lach pandan yo t ap retounen apre yo te fin achte manje nan yon makèt nan zòn nan. Se poutèt sa, jodi a nou te lanse yon operasyon militè pou pote yo sekou. Nou gen yon sèl objektif: fè kat konpatriyòt nou yo retounen lakay yo vivan, san okenn mal. Men, mwen vle pou nou menm, chèf gang yo, konprann yon bagay byen klè: atak jodi a pa anyen devan sa k ap vini si nou pa remèt toule kat otaj yo vivan. Epi pa pran pawòl nou yo pou menas san fondman. Nou deja fini ak gang yo nan El Salvador, e nou kapab fini ak nou tou. Nou toujou gen tan pou evite sa. Remèt nou kat konpatriyòt nou yo vivan, san okenn mal, epi tout bagay ap retounen jan sa te ye anvan kidnaping lan. Desizyon an nan men nou.

Jared agreed to a private forum with no live coverage, but he still won’t agree to a televised debate. And it’s clear why. When he was confronted about his vote to keep Ilhan Omar on the Foreign Affairs Committee — all he could say was “let’s move on” ... Even after the forum ended, he walked out without talking to the press. I stayed and talked with every reporter who had a question. No wonder he won’t agree to a televised debate. District 25 voters deserve answers.

🇮🇪 The Irish state has published an advert discouraging grandparents from hugging their grandchildren, as part of a campaign designed to promote "consent".

For @WSJFreeEx, I spoke with Jewish New Yorkers about the Democratic Party's leftward drift and animosity toward Israel. It's not just polls—the people I talked to are concerned. As some said, this isn't the Democratic Party they once knew.

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…

The Cook Political Report shifted its rating of Minnesota’s U.S. Senate race toward Republicans, another sign that a contest Democrats once expected to win comfortably has become increasingly competitive in the closing weeks of the campaign. wapo.st/4dOOGm6