‘Bond Villain’ Jeff Bezos Claims ‘You Could Double the Taxes I Pay’ and It Won’t Help Anyone

America Business Forum - Day 2

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos speaks at the America Business Forum on November 6, 2025 in Miami, Florida.

 (Photo by Alexander Tamargo/Getty Images for America Business Forum)

“Too much money contorts any human being,” said one critic of the Amazon founder.

Brad Reed

May 20, 2026 (CommonDreams.org)

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos drew ridicule on Wednesday after he claimed that doubling the amount of taxes he pays wouldn’t be beneficial to society.

During an interview on CNBC, journalist Andrew Ross Sorkin asked Bezos about arguments made by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) that the super-rich have lower effective tax rates than average Americans given how much of their wealth comes from unrealized capital gains and not traditional income earned through actual labor.

RECOMMENDED…

America Business Forum - Day 2

‘Are Readers Meant to Take This Seriously?’: Economist Refutes Latest Attack on Wealth Tax by Bezos’ Washington Post

A Four-Word Response for Those Upset With Jeff Bezos for Any Number of Reasons: 'Tax the Damn Rich'

A Four-Word Response for Those Upset With Jeff Bezos for Any Number of Reasons: ‘Tax the Damn Rich’

“I pay billions of dollars in taxes,” replied Bezos, whom Forbes estimates is worth $267 billion. “If people want me to pay billions more, then let’s have that debate. But don’t pretend, you know, that that’s going to solve the problem. You could double the taxes I pay, and it’s not gonna help that teacher in Queens, I promise you.”

A 2021 investigation by Pro Publica found that Bezos’ effective tax rate of less than 1% between 2014 and 2018, as he paid a total of $973 million in taxes over a period in which his net worth grew by $99 billion.

As explained by the Institute of Taxation and Policy (ITEP), this effective tax rate was “significantly lower” than the tax rate paid by middle-class Americans over that period.

“There were multiple years where Bezos paid nothing at all in income taxes,” ITEP noted. “While having billions of dollars of wealth, Bezos consistently avoided income tax by offsetting earned income with other investment losses and various deductions, all while Amazon stock was rapidly rising.”

Democratic congressional candidate Melat Kiros in Colorado suggested Bezos had a point about taxation—“because we tax income, not wealth.

“Bezos takes out a tiny salary, pays the income tax, and lives off loans borrowed against his stocks, basically tax-free,” said Kiros. “They all do this and now 935 billionaires hold more wealth than 170 million Americans. It’s time to tax wealth.”

Melanie D’Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, took issue with Bezos’ claim that doubling his taxes would produce no benefits.

“Jeff Bezos paid $500 million for his super-yacht and $75 million for his super-yacht’s mini-yacht—both of which he’s allowed to write off on his taxes,” she wrote in a social media post. “That alone would cover $180 in classroom supplies for every public school teacher in the US.”

Craig Harrington, research director at Media Matters for America, marveled at how out of touch Bezos seemed to be.

“There’s a funny thing about being uber wealthy,” he observed. “They get so rich that they lose all sense of place, they essentially manifest as stateless people with no connection to or understanding of the world outside their private airports and resplendent villas.”

Journalist and screenwriter David Simon expressed a similar view of the impact of immense wealth on Bezos’ psyche.

“Too much money contorts any human being,” Simon wrote. “And what was once a man is now, for the rest of the world, a fully metastasized cancer.”

Author Hemant Mehta, meanwhile, simply wondered if Bezos “auditioning to be the next Bond villain.”

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Brad Reed

Brad Reed is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

Full Bio >

Chakrabarti on corporate Dems

May 7, 2026 Corporate Dems in SF are starting to sound a lot like Republicans in Congress. Their message is clear: question the establishment, and you’re not welcome in the party. Well, sorry, but you don’t own this party. That’s why, tonight, we’re rallying with Hasan Piker and other candidates who are taking no corp money and primarying corporate Democrats across the country. Let’s take this party back so we can take this country back.

People Power United: Pass Articles of Impeachment to Remove Pete Hegseth Now

Your Power in Action: What You Can Do Today

Rosa Martinez abducted in international waters on Gaza flotilla

(freedomflotilla.org)

Rudy Martinez

An urgent message from Rosa Martinez, known as Rudy during their time as a student in San Marcos where they were an important part of the town’s literary and music community.

Rudy Martinez · Original audio

Our friends aboard the Gaza Freedom Flotilla have been intercepted by the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) or the forces of a country complicit in the …

See more: https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=476&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Freel%2F1297483085899740%2F&show_text=false&width=267&t=0

Call Rep. Nydia Velazquez: (202) 225-2361
Call Senator Gillebrand: (202) 224-4451
Call Senator Schumer: (202) 224-6542

Tom Steyer is Clear Progressive Choice

by Randy Shaw on May 18, 2026 (BeyondChron.org)

Will Democrats Take Top Two?

California’s Governor’s race has shifted. The risk of two Republicans topping the field has sharply declined. Xavier Becerra is first or second in recent polls with Tom Steyer close behind; both could make the November runoff.

I was out of the country when polls found Eric Swalwell voters primarily switching to Becerra. Bacerra has since become the Democratic frontrunner. How long this lasts is unclear. After long being ignored by rivals, Becerra is under attack in both paid media and major newspapers. He may have peaked too soon.

I’ve always had good feelings about Becerra. I met him last fall where we had a brief talk. I told him how disappointed I was that Senator Alex Padilla decided not to run for Governor; I didn’t know Becerra was a candidate).

Progressives are Backing Steyer

With Becerra now among the top two in polls, he offers the historic opportunity for California to elect a Latino Governor. But as looked into his backers I found virtually no progressive legislators. I had previously noted that two of the most solid Sacramento progressives—Isaac Bryan of Culver City and San Jose’s Alex Lee—had endorsed Tom Steyer. Steyer has since been endorsed by the California Nurses Association, the California Teachers Association, UNITE HERE, the Sierra Club and a host of other progressive organizations and activists.

Betty Yee, my original choice for governor, left the race and endorsed Steyer.

Some are reluctant to favor a white billionaire over a longtime Latino public official. But the political differences between Steyer and Becerra are not a close call. Steyer is clearly more progressive.

Steyer would be among the nation’s most progressive governors. And likely California’s most progressive governor since Jerry Brown first two terms. Unlike Brown and Gavin Newsom, Steyer would work more closely with legislators and constituency groups. Lacking the charisma and personal following of his predecessors, Steyer would bring a more collaborative leadership model.

Billionaires have spent millions attacking Steyer. Many rich people see Steyer as a traitor to his class.

The Mystery of CA Politics

The California economy is among the world’s largest. Yet few voters pay close attention to legislative actions in Sacramento. Nor do they seem well informed about what Governor Newsom actually does.

There isn’t much media coverage about what happens in California government outside of Newsom press events. I don’t think most California voters have a clear sense of the governor’s powers. They clearly do not hear enough about the backroom dealing that is par for the course in Sacramento.

California’s governor can create a positive progressive political model for the nation. Newsom tries to do this but when he promotes progressive state policies he’s accused of really promoting his expected 2028 presidential run.

Promoting a California policy model won’t be a problem for Tom Steyer.

What About Porter and Mahan?

Katie Porter is a solid progressive. She simply has not resonated with the electorate. In recent polls Porter is at 10% and 12%. She will not become California’s first woman governor.

For moderate Democrats, San Jose’s Matt Mahan remains in the race. In a February story I foresaw a huge upside for Mahan. I thought he could become the front-runner. But his campaign never took off despite ample funding from the tech sector.

The two most recent polls have Mahan in 6th place at 7% and 8%. It appears Mahan wasn’t ready to run a statewide campaign. Gavin Newsom held elective office for over a decade before running for Lieutenant Governor; Mahan started his political career on the San Jose City Council in 2021.

The overwhelming Democratic legislature is not as progressive as many believe. That’s why progressives need to support the most progressive governor’s candidate who can win. Tom Steyer is the one.

Randy Shaw

Randy Shaw is the Editor of Beyond Chron and the Director of San Francisco’s Tenderloin Housing Clinic, which publishes Beyond Chron. Shaw’s new book is the revised and updated, The Tenderloin: Sex, Crime and Resistance in the Heart of San Francisco. His prior books include Generation Priced Out: Who Gets to Live in the New Urban America. The Activist’s Handbook: Winning Social Change in the 21st Century, and Beyond the Fields: Cesar Chavez, the UFW and the Struggle for Justice in the 21st Century.

More Posts

San Francisco moves ahead with plan for public bank

By Alyce McFadden, Staff Writer May 19, 2026 (SFChronicle.com)

Gift Article

Supervisor Chyanne Chen will introduce a charter amendment at the Board of Supervisors meeting that would establish a municipal financial corporation, a precursor institution to a public bank. Manuel Orbegozo/For the S.F. Chronicle

San Francisco is taking a step toward opening a public bank, with time running out to move the plan forward. Supervisor Chyanne Chen will introduce a charter amendment at the Board of Supervisors meeting that would establish a municipal financial corporation, a precursor institution to a public bank. 

Proponents of the measure say a public bank would help San Francisco fund programs that align with its highest priorities, like building more affordable housing, supporting small businesses and meeting its climate goals. But such an institution could be the first in any contemporary American city, and some experts say it is unclear whether a public bank would succeed. 

“San Franciscans need and deserve bold solutions to address our most pressing challenges,” Chen said in a statement. “We must use every tool we can to keep San Francisco affordable and to advance solutions that lead towards a just economic recovery for all.”

The proposal will need to win the approval of a majority of the Board of Supervisors to appear on voters’ ballots in November. Four supervisors — Jackie Fielder, Bilal Mahmood, Myrna Melgar and Shamann Walton — have already signed onto the measure as co-sponsors. 

If it passes in November, it would codify the framework for how the institution would operate, drawing on a plan published in 2023 by a group convened to study how a public bank could work in San Francisco. The charter amendment would not provide a revenue stream to fund the bank but it would enshrine its rules, structure and mission in the city’s charter. To pass, it would require a simple majority of voters to approve it. 

The bank would be run by a board of qualified bankers appointed by an oversight committee whose members would be selected by the supervisors, the treasurer, the city attorney, the controller and the mayor. The layered appointment structure is designed to help insulate the bank against corruption or political influence, according to the 2023 report. 

Some San Francisco progressives have been pushing the city to create a public bank for years. In 2023, supervisors unanimously approved the plan outlined by The San Francisco Reinvestment Working Group, a body created by supervisors in 2021. The group’s final report forms the basis of Chen’s charter amendment.

Fielder, a progressive who represents the Mission and who has been on a leave of absence since March, founded the San Francisco Public Bank Coalition in 2017. The group helped push state lawmakers to pass a 2019 law giving cities and counties in California a path to creating their own public banks, but the law expires in 2028, giving San Francisco a short window to move on the plan.

“It feels like an incredible tool to add to the city’s tool kit,” said Misha Steier, a spokesperson for the coalition. “This is the culmination of years and years of movement effort.”  

In February, Fielder proposed a separate ballot measure that would fund a public bank through a tax increase on lending companies including mortgage brokers and credit card companies, according to Mission Local. Daniel Anderson, a spokesperson for the Our City Our Bank campaign that had been gathering signatures for that measure, said the campaign’s efforts will now focus instead on passing the charter amendment. 

Chen’s proposal would not designate a funding stream to direct money into the bank’s coffers, but bank leadership and San Francisco voters could separately decide how best to fund the institution later on, according to Steier. Raising money for the bank could prove challenging. San Francisco’s business community has organized to oppose a tax on big businesses that will come before voters as a ballot measure in June, arguing that new taxes could push employers out of San Francisco at a critical moment in the city’s economic recovery.

Several other jurisdictions in the state, including Los Angeles and Berkeley, have also explored public bank measures, but none have yet moved ahead. 

A public bank in San Francisco would be among the first of its kind in the United States. As a point of reference for how it might work, public banking advocates frequently point to North Dakota, which has had an effective public bank since the early twentieth century. It boasts significant profit margins and has administered disaster relief programs in the wake of flooding and agricultural crises.  

But Robert Chirinko, a professor of finance at the University of Illinois Chicago who has researched the effectiveness of public banking, says he sees little evidence that the model would necessarily work as well in San Francisco. According to his research, much of the North Dakota bank’s success stems from the state’s fracking boom and the fact that its funds are uninsured. Unlike a traditional bank, where deposits are insured by the federal government, North Dakota’s bank has no such protection. That saves the bank money but also means the state takes on a significant amount of risk. 

More broadly, Chirinko said local legislative bodies — like San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors — are best equipped to decide which public programs to fund in the name of social good. 

“Infrastructure, education, pollution, extending credit to low-income communities, et cetera: I have nothing against doing those things, but you should do it through the legislature,” he said. “You shouldn’t do this through this, basically, runaround.”

Steier said San Francisco’s proposal includes several layers of protection to reduce risk for money that is kept in the bank.  

Some examples of the types of projects the public bank could help finance include multi-family housing, electrification projects and small business expansions, according to Chen’s office. A public bank has several advantages over bonds, according to Steier, including the fact that “we’d be keeping the interest, the loans would be cheaper.” 

A municipal finance corporation “and Public Bank can help jumpstart the more than 10,000 affordable housing units in our pipeline that are stalled due to lack of financing, and incubate and grow our treasured local small businesses to help provide economic security for local entrepreneurs and their families,” said Chen in the statement.

May 19, 2026

Alyce McFadden

City Hall reporter

Alyce McFadden is a City Hall reporter at the San Francisco Chronicle covering the Board of Supervisors. McFadden previously worked at the New York Times, where she was a news assistant and reporting fellow. She covered Andrew Cuomo’s history of sexual harassmentthe trial of the man accused of attacking Salman Rushdie, the Los Angeles wildfires and the reaction to the killing of Charlie Kirk. McFadden has also written for Law360, OpenSecrets and the Maine Beacon. She’s a graduate of Bowdoin College, where she studied government and legal studies and was editor in chief of the student paper.

Tom Steyer for Governor of California

Here’s Why

Robert Reich May 19, 2026

Friends,

Recently, people have been asking me who I’m voting for in the California gubernatorial primary. Normally, I prefer to stay out of the primaries (I myself was involved in a contested primary way back when, but that’s another story).

Like most voters I know in California, I’ve been holding onto my ballot. It’s been an especially bruising campaign season, and folks are tired of the attack ads.

But it’s now time to commit. California voters must support a candidate for governor who will do the job the way it should be done.

I’m voting for Tom Steyer.

You may be thinking: a billionaire? Hear me out. Steyer is the only candidate with a plan to tax the wealthy and corporations to invest in public services.

Yes, the billionaire is the only candidate with a plan to tax billionaires.

Steyer is the only candidate who has said he’d vote for the billionaire wealth tax, and he’s also said we need to go even further. Under his revenue plan, he’d raise taxes on corporations and other billionaires to fund schools and healthcare.

Steyer understands that economic growth depends on a strong middle class, not trickle down nonsense.

On the issue of artificial intelligence, Steyer is the only candidate with a plan to tax Big Tech and share the gains with working people. Under Steyer’s plan, he will guarantee every worker impacted by AI has a good-paying job.

When it comes to single-payer healthcare, Steyer is also committed to making California a model for the rest of the nation.

But don’t take my word for it. Steyer’s progressive policies have won him the support of nurses, teachers, and other labor unions across the state. At the same time, PG&E, Chevron, and MAGA billionaires are spending millions against him.

We’ve had wealthy Democratic politicians before. FDR and JFK had tremendous fortunes, yet they enacted some of the most progressive policies in American history.

Meanwhile, the other candidates in the race for governor haven’t taken a stand on the billionaire wealth tax. Why? I fear it’s because they don’t want to upset the wealthy donors and corporations backing their campaigns. It’s that simple.

I love California. It’s been my home for nearly 30 years. We need progressive change, not more of the same.

Tom Steyer is the only viable candidate to deliver that change in Sacramento.