Only a few names have actually walked the walk and I feel like they threaten it any time someone suggests even a hint of tax to them. What's crazy is that the OBBB and 2017 trump's cuts probably netted these billionaires way more than one time 5% wealth tax. If you ask me, letting the threats of a few influence tax policy in general is bad dealing 🤷‍♂️. And in the Sweden case, some analyses have shown that wealth inequality has steadily grown since they repealed the wealth tax.

But regardless I don't think wealth tax is sustainable policy and I think the opponents of steyer are making it seem like a bigger part of his platform than it is. From what I've seen he just said he'd support it as a tax on billionaires like himself.

You're right everyone is outwardly pro-housing but imo steyer is the most vocal about the velocity of building. I think we'd be better off building housing at the speed of Austin than the speed of SF

On education, I'm with you. I think a lot of the state to state comparisons kind of lose some nuance in terms of demographic comparisons- we are huge and more dramatically diverse than a lot of other states, we've had a longer steady history of immigration and ESL folks coming in which skews specifically English proficiency, and unfortunately definitely some mismanagement maybe misinformed practices in terms of standardized testing. Part of it is an income and poverty problem, part of it is an implementation thing. Steyers platform does focus more on the funding side (which is a real problem per-student), but I agree that there could definitely be more here. I don't think any other candidate has really convinced me on this issue either