The state senator — who has never met a housing mandate he didn't love or a transit spending bill he couldn't champion — is breaking with progressive orthodoxy by opposing California's proposed billionaire tax. And for once, the reasoning isn't complicated. It's just math.

California already has the highest marginal income tax rate in the nation at 13.3%. The state has watched a steady exodus of high-net-worth individuals and the companies they run over the past several years. Texas, Florida, Nevada — they've all rolled out the welcome mat while Sacramento keeps reaching deeper into the pockets of anyone still stubborn enough to stay. A billionaire tax isn't a revenue strategy. It's a going-away party.

The progressive wing of the legislature loves these proposals because they poll well. "Tax the billionaires" fits neatly on a protest sign. But the economic reality is messier. California's budget is already dangerously dependent on capital gains revenue from a tiny sliver of ultra-wealthy taxpayers. When the market dips, the state budget craters. Adding another punitive layer on top doesn't diversify revenue — it doubles down on a volatile bet while giving the wealthiest residents one more reason to file their next return from Austin.

Wiener, to his credit, seems to understand that performative taxation isn't the same as functional governance. You can't fund schools, infrastructure, and homeless services with money from people who've already left.

Meanwhile, there's an interesting subplot: a conservative think tank is reportedly looking to establish a presence in San Francisco. Given the city's growing frustration with unchecked spending and declining quality of life, the timing might be better than you'd think. Fiscal sanity shouldn't be a partisan concept — it should be the baseline.

We don't agree with Wiener on much. But when someone in Sacramento actually acknowledges that you can't tax your way to prosperity, we'll give credit where it's due. Even if it means checking for a cold front in hell.