Can you help direct me towards where you would like further clarification specifically? It sounds like you are confused about how the people of California is related to the economy of California. It also sounds like you’re not sure how billionaires’ businesses are tied to wealth or established businesses in California.

Amazon was just an example for the context of the conversation for how billionaires’ businesses would still want/need to play by California rules to do business in California.

Billionaires are not inherently separate from their companies. That much I want to lay out front and center here at the start. Bezos can easily move his residence to Texas or Colorado and pay taxes for the business he has in Texas or Colorado. He still owes income taxes to each state he personally does business in.

Now, Bezos might not tie a lot of business to his personal name so his own personal income taxes are probably not showing up as if it’s through multiple states. But Amazon itself is paying taxes based on where it conducts business. Amazon the company rubber stamps a paycheck and stock package to Bezos, of which he’s paying state and federal taxes based on where he lives for his paycheck. If his permanent residence is in a state where there is not state income taxes then his personal income tax statement would not be as high as if he had it paid out in Washington or California.

My guy, let’s drop the snark for a minute here if we’re having a dialogue. You know we’re talking about Californians and business in California.

Not everyone lives in California, but based on the context of the conversation of California’s economy, then businesses doing business with Californians are subject to California law and California taxes. If Amazon wants to sell to people in California then they have to play ball by California’s rules for instance.

I think we’d better prepare a progressive front runner sooner rather than later. Otherwise we end up like California’s most recent governor primary where the most progressive candidates didn’t really step forward until the last minute, knocked each other out, and now California gets another Newsome-lite type candidate as the front runner against a Republican rather than up against a Progressive.

What happened is largely the fault of the voting system being a jungle primary instead of a more favorable system like a Ranked Robin version of ranked choice voting.

The people. People makeup an economy and are the primary driving force. Also the cashflow of those people. If big businesses want to make more money then they will want to be doing business with Californians.

The only reason it could be him and not a progressive is if progressives split their votes while the corporate-backed party members defer their votes to him, which is pretty much what happened in 2020’s primary.

If the Democratic primary happens with most states using a form a Ranked Choice Voting for their party’s primary, then progressives have a better chance since the progressive candidates aren’t knocking each other out of the running.

Not to harp on here, but the other comments didn’t talk as much about the billionaires/corporations fleeing the state part that you brought up.

Realistically, most companies are not leaving California in general because they lose access to one of the biggest economies globally if they do. These companies print money hand over fist for the board of directors and owners.

Many companies will just eat whatever tax since if they leave the state, they lose marketshare and revenue. If the owners themselves leave the state, they’re still paying taxes on what’s generated in the state.

I feel for certain instances this is true. I’m not sure if it’s people treating this place like Reddit in some ways, or if it’s people/bots trying to bully others out for not sharing their specific views, whatever the topic

I think there could be some bad actors at play trying to drive people out of the Fediverse; making it more Reddit-like with the bot bullying style would be an effective way for them to drive people away that don’t share their opinions. Mass downvoting your comments or posts can be part of the dog piling.

I see the behavior a lot more on Lemmy.world, hexbear, .ml, and .grad instances.

Someone reaching out isn’t burdensome for me; I feel it’s only emotionally draining if someone calls back to back really quickly after a conversation or keeps me on the phone for over thirty minutes around meal times and I’m trying to exit the conversation.

What does feel risky for me is taking a chance to reach out to someone after a long time and they cut the connection entirely then and there. The relationship was likely severed a while ago but that confirms it in that moment. Much more often though it’s because that friend is from a specific time in my life and things have changed for them or for me and we haven’t really had a chance to sort out changed dynamics of the friendship. Missing/not reaching out during/after important things can sour some friendships too.

Real friends can fall into these groups as well is the thing.

I personally don’t have spare energy to maintain active friendships with the dozens of people I’m close with, but I don’t expect anything from them either since we’re both burdened and I don’t care less about them just because we haven’t talked. If they are a true friend of mine it will be like a day has not passed between us.

Another thing is some people can feel awkward about reaching out if it’s been some time as well.

How old are you currently and how old are your friends? You don’t have to actually answer that question but I think it would give you a bit more insight into what’s happening. Many friendships transform slowly based on the life path you or your friends are on, with path diverging more each year if you are not both headed towards the same life goals.

For instance, if a friend of yours wants to get married and have kids, then they’re probably going to be prioritizing their relationships with their family or with other friends planning families since it’s easier to stay in sync with these people.

If your friend likes to party, stay up later than you, and push on your newer comfort zones, then it makes it more challenging to maintain an active friendship. If you were that way in the past with your friend and are no longer that way, then you have to juggle an old identity that doesn’t quite fit anymore and a new one which may not match your friend’s path.

Expectations change in relationships as well, especially if you’re living with your SO. Seeing your friends once or twice a week after work might not fly, especially if you have kids that require more oversight, attention, and care.

Even just texting friends requires some mutual engagement. If your friends also have a lot of friends it’s probably even tougher for them to be juggling texting each of these friends and staying up to date on everything they have going on. If they have three friend groups and an SO for instance, that’s about one weekend a month with each friend group plus at minimum one spent with their family.

I frequently will take days to get back to my own family or even my best friend, it’s not because I don’t care but often because they are asking for a time investment I’m not ready to commit to in that moment (eg, them saying “let’s do x on y day” when I have no clue if I have another commitment with my immediate family on y day). If I got more questions like “do you think you’ll have time in the next week or so?” it’d be easier give a more definitive answer as well since it’s more accommodating of my time.

TL;DR: You could be doing everything ‘right’, but that doesn’t mean the specific people you’re friends with have the bandwidth for the more active friendship you’re looking for. Not everything or everyone is set in stone though, circumstances can change and so can people’s hearts.

It’s a bad deal that only policy could really fix at this point.

If you’re the only store with real menu prices then customers just get price shocked at what they’re actually going to be paying when they can go next door to another restaurant that doesn’t tell you the full price up front. Customers would be upset at a mid $18 burger, but are fine with a mid $16 burger + $2 tip.

Imo, the problems stem from the forced rat race of no one having enough money excluding the rich. Prices being high wouldn’t matter if people got paid more, but cause we’re not getting paid more, the companies that target the general population just make everything into cheap knockoff crap to still turn the same or better profit margins.