Scott argues that California's proposed billionaire tax is actually an extortion scheme by SEIU, which has a history of proposing destructive ballot initiatives and withdrawing them in exchange for concessions. Longer summary

Scott argues that California's 2026 Billionaire Tax Act is not a genuine progressive wealth tax proposal, but rather an extortion scheme by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). He explains the tax's various problems (including taxing unrealized gains and being retroactive), then reveals SEIU's history of proposing deliberately destructive ballot initiatives targeting healthcare industries, only to withdraw them in exchange for money and union expansion rights. The union has done this repeatedly with hospitals and dialysis clinics, spending millions on initiatives they never intended to pass. Scott suggests the billionaire tax follows the same pattern: SEIU is leveraging Governor Newsom's presidential ambitions and desire to keep tech billionaires happy, hoping he'll offer concessions to make the initiative disappear. Shorter summary

Scott examines San Francisco's apparent improvement in homelessness, finding the main effect was decreased tent encampments due to court rulings allowing easier clearing, not actual reduction in homeless population, revealing a basic tradeoff between visibility and homeless welfare. Longer summary

Scott investigates why San Francisco's homelessness crisis appears to have improved, finding that the main effect was a dramatic decrease in tent encampments (not overall homelessness) due to court rulings making it easier to clear them. He analyzes four potential explanations: encampment clearing after legal changes starting in 2023, a possible small decrease in actual homelessness due to falling rents and enforcement driving people to hide, Mayor Lurie's policies (which he finds mostly ineffective), and claims about cities shipping homeless people elsewhere (which he finds largely unsupported). Scott concludes this is a 'maximally boring story' about a basic tradeoff where cities made homelessness less visible at the cost of making homeless people's lives harder, challenging both his previous belief that nothing could improve the problem without mass incarceration and the opposing view that 'getting tough' would be compassionate. Shorter summary

The post argues against California's Proposition 36, claiming it will increase imprisonment without effectively reducing crime or drug use, and suggests alternative solutions. Longer summary

This post argues against California's Proposition 36, which aims to increase mandatory sentences for certain drug and theft crimes. The author contends that while Prop 36 will certainly imprison more people, it won't effectively combat crime. The post analyzes the proposition's impact on drug-related offenses and theft, using data to show that increased sentencing doesn't correlate with reduced drug use or crime rates. It also points out the lack of treatment resources required by the proposition and the potential negative impact on existing crime prevention programs. The author suggests that instead of longer sentences, California should focus on targeted interventions, increased police resources, and expanding treatment options for drug addiction. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander humorously reviews the 26 candidates for California governor in 2022, highlighting their diverse backgrounds and unconventional policy ideas. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reviews the 26 candidates for California governor in 2022, providing humorous and insightful commentary on each candidate's background, policies, and campaign style. He covers a wide range of candidates, from established politicians to small business owners, immigrants, and even a former poet laureate. The post highlights the diversity of candidates and their often unconventional approaches to addressing California's issues, particularly homelessness. Scott concludes by expressing admiration for the candidates' spirit of optimism and civic engagement, seeing them as a positive sign for American democracy despite their slim chances of winning. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues that many people missed an opportunity to have a realistic chance of becoming Governor of California in the recall election, and analyzes why this happened. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses a unique political opportunity in California's recall election of Governor Gavin Newsom. He argues that almost anyone with a slight amount of fame or money could have positioned themselves to have a 5-10% chance of becoming Governor. The post explains the recall process, the current political landscape, and how the leading Democratic replacement candidate, Kevin Paffrath, a YouTube landlord influencer, gained his position. Scott suggests that many people, including himself, missed this opportunity and could have been in Paffrath's place. He explores various counterarguments and concludes with thoughts on opportunity recognition and the nature of power. Shorter summary