Income tax time again

[Citizen James]

What I find interesting is how much discretionary domestic spending has increased under this supposedly conservative administration.

And yet, it's still not enough.  Bush has massively increased federal education spending, and the liberals are still complaining it isn't enough.

With all these increases, are schools demonstrably better than they were in, say, 1999, the heyday of the Clinton presidency?  I think we know the answer on that.

The other interesting thing is that the same people who say Bush isn't spending enough pine for the days of Clinton, when domestic spending was quite a bit less.  It seems we were getting along pretty well back then with lower spending, but the answer is always said to be more spending.

I think that we should simply reduce our spending to the levels of 1999 and be done with it.  That would save hundreds of billions of dollars per year without, apparently, really hurting anybody.

Mostly because he's demanding additional expenses in education which are higher than the additional funds.  Frequent standardized testing isn't cheap.

And though I applaud the idea of making sure there that all students have teachers who are "highly qualified" (That is highly trained and skilled in both educational technique, pedagogy, and their subject area), only hardcore idealists are going to dive an extra 25k into debt to get a postgraduate degree for a job which pays about 42k a year.  (and even if you mistakenly believe that summers don't count, , or that teachers just go home and relax after 3 - rather than spending an extra 6 hours doing lesson planning, grading papers, and filling out volumes of paperwork - that would still be well below the 'typical' hourly pay rate for your 'typical' holder of an advanced degree.

If you want "natural market forces" to fill that gap, you're either going to have to pay a lot more, or (in typical GOP fashon) allow the private sector to ignore the rules and provide poor instruction and moderate cost for most and good instuction for high cost for a few.

[Citizen James]

I think that you have to consider what you are getting for all your tax money.
Schools- Free Education for your children K-12
Roads- You couldn't get to work to make your money without them
Police protection- The cops suck when they're handing you a speeding ticket but you'd better thank Jesus they're there.
Fire Protection- Just might come in handy
Military Protection- There's a lot of pork here but it's a worthy cause
Parks- Making life more pleasant
Social Security- Keeping you from having to support your elderly parents/grandparents.
Medical research- Hopefully, we can kick cancer before I'm old
College Aid-Most Americans wouldn't make it past high school without it.

I'm not here to argue that everything the government does is efficient or wise, but you have to consider all the good things you're getting before you bitch about taxes.  Federal Budget for 2006 is 2.6 trillion dollars, which comes to about $9,000 for each man, woman, and child. If you're not paying that much for each member of your family, you're getting a bargain.

I agree.  I think the more important question is whether or not the money is being spent wisely.  Arguably, the first, fourth, and fifth items on your list tend to be primarally funded by the states.

Still, the questions remain for many - would an extra 3000 be enough for you to take care of your grandparents for a year?  (or are you cool with tossing them out on the street?)

Is blowing stuff up in Iraq worth an extra $500 of your pay, in addition to the 3000 or so you're already spending on national defense.

Is 1500 or so reasonable compared to large numbers of people in lower incomes (including children and people who perform basic labor) dropping dead en masse.  Does the safety and well being of children mean anything after they are born?  If the many poor who do the less 'desirable' jobs die off for a lack of even minimal healthcare, what will the laws of supply and demand do to the cost of basic services - and all the other services which depend on them?

Is $50 worth not having the above stare to death?  Is $20 worth having a larger group of highly educated individuals for companies to choose from for more complex jobs (remember supply and demand again - when the people are well educated, the cost of labor declines for jobs requiring educational atainment).

What about the people who left a limb behind in Vietnam?  Or in Iraq?  Do we just dump them on the street and ignore their health needs despite their answering the call of their country?  Or is "support our troops" nothing more than a catchphrase.

What we need is to make sure the money is being spent responsibly, not a short-minded strategy which ignores long term gains in favor of short term greed.