A lot of communities are willing to support pork coming to their areas, and to a few people in their areas, because they think that they are overall, net gainers. The net losers are people in other areas. But how will they feel if “their” pork comes in a package that leaves them as net losers? Even worse, note the clever people, is the fact that the gainers in their area are the few porkers (porkees?), which implies that non-porkers are losing MUCH more than the average may show.

That’s why I think that San Diego voters will reject the $11 billion bond. Although it promises to deliver $100 million in pork,* they are going to pay far more (through tax payments to the general fund), leaving them as net pork losers.**

Bottom Line: Pork is bad for society and it’s often bad for its “beneficiaries.” Just say no to pork!

** SD paid $3.6 of the State’s $45 billion in 2006 income taxes and about $2.85 billion in sales tax in 2008 (this and this). Given the State’s total tax take of $80 billion, SD paid $6.5 billion, or 8.125% of the total. How much pork should SD get out of the water bonds? $900 million. That means that SD’s porkers will have to convince SD’s citizens that they are getting an additional $800 million in “benefits.” Can’t wait to see the lies and pork-a-ganda they come out with!

Hattips to DW and RD