[greatjones]

Your comment that San Diego, Orange County and LA should not have to pay for infrastructure work in San Francisco presupposes that the Bay Area is contributing less to state taxes then it's receiving. I'm interested to understand stats on geographic collection/distribution of taxes in CA, and how you know the Bay Area is a net beneficiary. I'd venture that the national trend of wealthy cities paying more state/federal taxes then they receive applies within CA.

Also, suggesting that state taxes should not be unevenly distributed among the state misses the point of state taxes. It's fine to argue where the funds should best be used, but not that a county should only get the proportion it contributed. Why not just have local governments be the primary collectors/distributors of taxes then?

BTW, I love southern CA and think you're awesome :)

[SCAQTony]

Thank you, I go to San Francisco every year. I had no problem with financing the Oakland Bridge but the subway a subway has present danger and high costs.

GDP Distribution per Brookings Institute numbers:

Los Angeles: $860-billion San Francisco: $331-billion San Diego: $202-billion San Jose $173-billion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP

I cannot find the numbers for Orange County as a whole.