> To put this into perspective our city has a larger budget than 12 individual US States
It also has a larger GDP than something like 36 individual US states (don't have same year numbers, but only 14 states -- and, obviously, one of those is California -- have 2015 GDP [0] higher than SF's 2014 GDP [1]) -- and that's not just because its bigger in population than some states, since only four states (Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, and North Dakota) have smaller population than SF.
> Is it possible to utilize our current resources more effectively?
SF could do much better with the amount of taxes we pay. I have no idea where the taxes go, but the state of some roads (let alone public transportation) is pretty bad. San Francisco is only doing so well because it's the only "lively" city around Silicon Valley.
I'd wager a good chunk of it goes to ensuring the money is being spent correctly.
When I was an undergrad my boss was the grant writer. Half the money (and a lot of time) went into compliance and accounting.
Another example is the joke about construction projects; 1 guy digs the hole, another guy supervises the guy digging the hole, a union rep watches over the guy digging the whole, government rep makes sure the guy digging the whole is to spec, environmental guy makes sure the guy digging the whole isn't causing environmental damage. Individually, all these people are necessary, but as you add more requirements and more compliance it takes up a lot of money.
And that's what happens when people say I don't know where the tax money goes. Another committee gets formed, more forms to fill in are created.
> Yeah, but this ignores the fact that the CA budget, and CA taxes, alone are enormous.
Not as a share of GDP, compared to other states. Its roughly comparable to other big states (though higher than Texas), and lower than lots of states run by what purport to be small-government conservatives.
California's budget is big in absolute terms, sure, but so is its nearly $2.5 trillion GDP.
SF's budget share of SF's GDP + California's budget share of California's GDP is less than many states budget share of GDP alone (without considering local budget shares.)
It also has a larger GDP than something like 36 individual US states (don't have same year numbers, but only 14 states -- and, obviously, one of those is California -- have 2015 GDP [0] higher than SF's 2014 GDP [1]) -- and that's not just because its bigger in population than some states, since only four states (Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, and North Dakota) have smaller population than SF.
> Is it possible to utilize our current resources more effectively?
Seems to me SF is doing something right.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_GDP
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_GDP