... I was actively thinking of the scary statistic that in one of the poorest communities (I think it might be the poorest community, actually) in the US, Oglala Lakota on the Pine Ridge reservation, 25% of children are now being born with fetal alcohol syndrome.
Tribal reservations within the US geographical boundaries such as
Pine Ridge are their own sovereign nations with their own form of government. Ironically the population you mention is poor, but somehow choosing to afford enough alcohol to damage their offspring. This is tragic. Meanwhile, I am aware of many organizations funneling
care to
Pine Ridge.
I believe that ultimately it is up to US taxpayers to determine how US tax money is to be spent.
And that is what is going to happen
It seems we agree?
Why would you be opposed to the intellectual exercise of refuting an argument on its merits?
I would not be opposed to the intellectual exercise of refuting an argument on its merits. But rather than an argument with merits, I see strong statements of opinion:
You can... expect parents to support... having to pay taxes or contributions for universal high quality preschool and health care for all children, since this benefits all children, regardless of parents income.
...
Likewise, I am all for aggressive economic desegregation of schools, and, by means of public housing programs, neighbourhoods
...
You can (and, morally, I believe, should) make sure that public services are levelled.
I understand that according to the US constitution, taxes and the budget are the purview of Congress, which is elected by US citizens regardless of taxpaying status. Is that something you’d like to see changed?
No. But I see your question as revealing a possible misunderstanding or conflation of the concepts of:
- voting to elect Congress,
- Congress voting on the budget.
Do you feel that citizens of lower financial status aren’t created equal?
No. But I feel that your question may be baiting and an attempt to veer the conversation off-topic.
What if there were a meaningful discrepancy between what a majority of citizens eligible to vote were to prefer and what a majority of taxpaying citizens would prefer?
I would anticipate that elected representatives would continue to analyze the amount of taxes likely to be collected and available to the US government to budget for spending on various programs and services... and weigh that against the burgeoning
National Debt... then attempt raising taxes, which tends to trigger taxpayer feedback.
educational outcomes... every dollar spent wisely on chiildren...
Allocating more money to public education does not necessarily invest in children by providing more teachers, aides, materials, etc... but may instead result in higher payments to teacher's unions, salaries, benefits, more layers of government bureaucracy, administrative red tape, etc.
In the US the average
government school teacher's salary:
- exceeds average
personal income,
- is the largest part of most government school budgets,
- may be part of a compensation package which also includes life-long post-retirement benefits.
As others have acknowledged upthread, the experiences related in the OP's article do not describe life in mainstream America. I personally do
not resent the successes of others, but find them inspirational. I applaud the
significant philanthropic efforts of the Davidsons, in creating the Davidson Institute for Talent Development (including this gifted issues discussion forum), following their business success.
