Pudge at Sound Politics Rants:
So speaking of how Robert Reich can’t add, I wonder whether Rob McKenna can. He says we should spend the same amount of money — as a percentage of our budget — should be the same now as in 1980. I don’t have all the numbers (and would greatly welcome them if someone’s got them), but I suspect this might end up giving us much more money, even adjusted for inflation, for education than we had in 1980.
Where is the significance, except in pure symbolism, of a percentage of the budget? I can see none at all. And what especially bothers me is that, as I understand it, per-pupil spending for K-12 has increased dramatically since 1980. So where’s the actual need for more spending on education at all?
And don’t even get me started on higher ed: we should slash it to the bone. We shouldn’t fund any of it, at all.
But even if you disagree with me about relative levels of spending on education … can we at least agree that tying those levels to the size of the budget makes absolutely no sense whatsoever?