-=> On 04-07-98  23:05, Walter Luffman did testify and affirm <=-
-=> to Robert Craft concerning advert. for 23% sales tax <=-
 
 RC> Generalities aside, taxes should not impoverish citizens.
 RC> IOW, no tax on income < 110% of the poverty level.
 WL> I agree in principle, but I don't really care for the term
 WL> "poverty level", much less letting the federal government
 WL> determine what the poverty level is.  Can't come up with
 WL> an alternative offhand, though, so let's use it for the
 WL> sake of argument.
Poverty level is easily ascertained without goverment
intervention. Assuming four components of expenditures:
food, clothing, shelter and transportation; realistic
minimums can be established. 
Food - any nutritionist can design a minimum diet meeting
all the daily requirements and any high school home econ
class can take that minimum diet and create a minimum-cost
market basket.
Similar minimums can be established for clothing, shelter
and transportation. Sum the 4 categories and that's the
poverty level.
 RC> Other exemptions, such as for education, will be more
 RC> controversial.
 WL> They will be, but they shouldn't be. After all, education
 WL> of children is a part of child-rearing and therefore a
 WL> legitimate part of the state's concern.
I agree. It's even in the state's *financial* interest to
foster education. After all, one collects more in taxes
from an engineer with a master's degree than a counter
waiter at Hardee's.
 WL> Notice that I did not say that the state has a right to an
 WL> unfair advantage over private concerns when it comes to
 WL> running schools. 
Agree completely.
 WL> I think government's educational involvement
Local goverment with a minimum of state oversight and *no*
Federal intervention.
 WL> should be limited to funding public schools with state and
 WL> local taxes,
How 'bout education vouchers instead?
 WL> and setting/enforcing _minimum_ standards for both the
 WL> contents of curriculum
4 yrs English, math thru algebra, 4 years history, etc?
Actual content/perspective would be up to the school board
and implemented by choice of texts purchased.
 WL> and the people responsible for teaching;
Teacher testing and recertification.
 WL> schools should be encouraged to exceed those minimum
 WL> standards,
And it would be good advertizing in a competitive
environment to be able to claim: "Our graduating class
averaged 1200 on the SAT."
 WL> with funding increased as schools exceed those standards --
 WL> demonstrated by independent testing of students' knowledge.
Parents would gladly pay an excise tax on the education
voucher in order to get their kids enrolled.
 WL> The federal government's role in education, except for
 WL> special cases such as the service academies and ROTC, should
 WL> be limited to establishing and administering a program to
 WL> help educators in various locales exchange information and
 WL> ideas for the benefit of all; I envision something similar
 WL> to a network of investigative reporters looking for good
 WL> (and bad!) ideas and exceptional teachers, then publishing
 WL> their findings in a journal.
The Federal government's only notable success in education
was the GI Bill. I suspect that detailed analysis would
show that the GI Bill made a profit, in that the government
got more income tax from GI Bill graduates than the program
cost. But, then again, when one considers the selection
criteria for the initial Gi Bill... 
... Rodham Hood - she steals from everybody and gives to the government.
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0
---------------