<p>Collective sacrifice for the common good should not be viewed dismissively as a “platitude.” It once was, and should again become, the dominant and honored attitude of the nation’s best and brightest. Instead, we have the anachronism of 21st century citizens thinking of themselves as high tech cowboys responsible to no one but themselves, but the frontier is gone. For better or worse, we do live in a very large and very diverse society where we cannot just light out for the territories to set up a new society if we don’t like how things are going locally. </p>
<p>I absolutely agree that government has lost credibility and that corruption and special interests have diminished the political class. The goal however should be to resuscitate government, not bury it.</p>
<p>While every individual is free to pay taxes voluntarily, or even donate money to the government, such gestures from a few would be symbolic at best and would not solve the problems. Because of rampant cynicism, very few people could be motivated to do so. Taxes are the price of civilization, and the taxes are much lower than they used to be. I don’t believe in confiscatory taxes, but the wealthy can clearly pay more. When people talk about raising taxes, the $250k a year is middle class or less. When people talk about government and teacher salaries, then $75k is outrageous luxury.</p>
<p>Applying these beliefs to education, I view public universities in California as an incredible bargain for the wealthy, but out of reach for the poor, absent scholarships. Increasing tuition on the wealthy to subsidize the poor with academic talent seems appropriate to me, as long there is a sliding scale of relief to keep the middle class from being squeezed out. The U.C.'s are not for everyone, and the State universities are important too. Not everyone wants, needs, or is capable of taking advantage of an “elite” education (though very fine educations can certainly be had at the Cal State Universities too). This talk of not wanting my tax dollars to pay someone else’s tuition is a recipe for destroying public education when, as a society, we should be trying to improve it. The intoxicating effect of the anti-government tea being consumed reminds me of the Hogarth print of the drunken mother tossing the baby out of the window with the bathwater; fixing the problem requires care and consideration, not a Bacchanalian frenzy of anti-government tax slashing.</p>
<p>Home schooling is a terrific option for families who can afford to have one adult stay home and teach, at least until a science lab is required. There are abundant free resources on the Web, like the Khan Institute, which can teach an amazing amount of material without a class room if the parent and student are properly motivated. However, many families do not have that luxury because both parents need to work, so public schools are necessary. Because they are necessary, as a society we should try to improve them even if they will not benefit our respective families directly, not gut them. I think excellent online resources should be used in underperforming schools and students should not advance until they demonstrate mastery of each section, which they can do over and over until they master it. There are doubtless many other and better ideas for improving public education at all levels. Thoughtlessly throwing money at the problems is a bad idea, but so is greedily cutting funding because your student doesn’t need it.</p>
</p>