For example the rant about "capital gains taxes" doesn't include the reason why you can't tax something that is not sold yet. It is wrong on so many levels. Suppose you have a home that is going up 10% and is worth +50000 USD. You haven't sold it yet, but you owe a tax out of the blue. Isn't that a bad idea?
The out of context part for this particular issue is the qualification of Marc about "yes we know that 100 million looks like a lot, but they won't be able to raise the money they hope and will be forced to lower the threshold". Also she didn't mentioned that 50% of all tax receipts in CA are from the wealthy. So every 50 cent on the dollar are already collected from the most mobile population and they'd leave and this measure won't work at all.
You'd find nothing on that in the article.