Letters: Wealthy should pay more, but not with this measure

California voters are divided over a November ballot measure to tax billionaires to fund healthcare, with supporters arguing the wealthy owe the communities that built their fortunes and opponents warning the tax could expand to middle-class homeowners and drive businesses out of state.

Getting your Trinity Audio //trinityaudio.ai player ready... Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor. Wealthy should pay, but not with this measure Re: “ Why I support billionaire tax to fund state https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/06/19/lee-i-represent-silicon-valley-heres-why-i-support-taxing-its-billionaires/ ” Page A10, June 21 . I agree a wealth tax is needed, but not the billionaire tax on the ballot in November. Here is why: There is a provision in the tax that allows it to be extended to individuals with significantly lower net worth, so when more tax money is needed, they will be coming after our net worth home and 401K values . This tax revenue is only earmarked for statewide healthcare expansion; it does nothing for improving public schools, reducing housing costs or supporting retraining programs for the workforce where Californians are also struggling. Finally, look at Hollywood. It is a ghost town; everything is produced out of state. Do we really want to drive out one of the only thriving industries in the state? Tom Elardy San Ramon Obama speech gives hope of healing nation As we approach America’s 250th birthday, I worry our nation is breaking away from our democratic values. Our country was built, and is enriched, by immigrants. Diversity is our unique strength, bringing talents and perspectives that lead to innovative technologies, novel scientific discoveries and cultural riches. Yet, the current, overtly racist administration is bent on destroying what we’ve all built. Denying the contributions of so many takes us backwards. How is this great? We also fall behind when we don’t invest in science, sustainable energy sources and programs that our communities need to thrive. Just look at how China is creating jobs and building its economy through its renewable energy leadership. However, listening to Michelle Obama’s eloquent June 18 speech https://barackobama.medium.com/president-obama-and-mrs-obamas-remarks-at-the-opening-of-the-obama-presidential-center-cb614fd04bdd at the Obama Presidential Library raises hope, hope that we will indeed harness the empathy and goodness inside each of us. Otherwise, America will sadly continue to become increasingly un-American. Christine Young Fremont Billionaires should help folks who built fortune Re: “ Why I support billionaire tax to fund state https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/06/19/lee-i-represent-silicon-valley-heres-why-i-support-taxing-its-billionaires/ ” Page A10, June 21 . I agree with Alex Lee’s rationale for a billionaire’s tax this November, a measure supported by many California voters. It must be acknowledged that tech fortunes were built on investments by generations of Californians, who paid for the infrastructure roads, canals, ports, airports, educational institutions and so many other things on which Silicon Valley’s wealth rests. Even today, tech companies could not function without the local workforce — janitors, cooks, servers, delivery personnel, administrative staff and others. California is now a land of extremes, with billionaires and people living on the streets. No one is asking the wealthy to give up their fortunes, just to share a little to help the communities that made them so rich. Whatever happened to the idea of noblesse oblige that the better off have a moral obligation to help the less fortunate, as this tax does? Kakoli Banerjee San Jose Newsom has embraced the billionaire class Re: “ Billionaire tax proposal has enough support to get on California ballot https://apnews.com/article/california-billionaire-tax-ballot-healthcare-beee1e49297b8371d9f0836cdde7a9de ” Page A4, June 19 . Does Gov. Newsom oppose the billionaire tax because he is kissing up to the billionaires for their money in his next political campaign? Abraham Lincoln might have trouble getting elected in today’s political system. He might even revise his famous words to describe a government “of the billionaires, by the billionaires, for the billionaires.” Follow the money. For example, thousands of dollars flowed from PG&E to a film production company https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article316140563.html owned by Newsom’s wife. Newsom loudly dismissed concerns about any conflict of interest, then he vetoed https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/10/gavin-newsom-veto-ab-44-740-541-california-bills-clean-energy-grid-reliability-high-costs/ a pro-consumer bill that could have saved Californians $550 million annually on their PG&E bills. Newsom’s political committee purchased 67,000 copies of his book https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/16/us/politics/newsom-book-donors.html , propelling it onto The New York Times bestseller list, where it was marked with the dagger indicating bulk purchases. We need leaders who still believe in Lincoln’s vision of a government “of the people, by the people, for the people.” Curtis Panasuk San Jose Wealthy should pay more Social Security tax Re: “ Social Security’s retirement trust fund faces funding shortfall one year earlier than expected https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/06/09/social-security-medicare-trust-fund/ ” June 9 . It is reported that Social Security will go bankrupt by 2032. Of course, there is a simple and fair solution. Now, any income above $184,500 https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/planner/maxtax.html is exempt from Social Security taxes. So anyone with income below that figure pays Social Security taxes all year. For billionaires and trillionaires , that figure would be satisfied in the first few seconds of the year. The solution: Extend Social Security taxes for the ultra-wealthy for a few months. With the historic wealth and income inequality in the United States, this is an obvious answer. But since Big Money controls Congress and the presidency, it is not likely to happen. Until campaign finance laws limiting contributions are restored and corporations are no longer considered “people” with constitutional rights, this injustice will continue. Brian Carr San Jose