It is specific to the US. No other rich country has such a hierarchicalized educational system.

Which are excellent examples of locally funded items.

I'm a fan of what is known as subsiderasion.

You’re also a fan of not educating citizens.

Education could be both broader and more specialized, at various points in the process. I think canonical subjects, reading/writing/math, should continue to be rigorously taught in K-8. Basic civics/ethics/history should also be offered in the later stages of this level's curriculum.

Once children get to high school, there should be options available for students to focus on developing aptitude to master a trade, or specialize in a particular subject or subjects for further study in college. To be clear, the general broad scope of subjects currently offered should remain, and would likely be the most probable of the chosen paths, but it should not be so lock-step. There should also be options for electives in finance/economics/etc. for students in grades 11/12.

False.

They are also examples of federally funded items.

We actually live in a very large country not 50 small ones.
There's no getting around the need for a large federal government.
Like it or not.

But I suppose state grants can be issued for education if the taxpayers deem it a priority. There will always be different local needs.

Google has literally nothing on your term, but, uh,

Nah. I only spent a semester abroad but it seemed far worse in the UK.

The VAST MAJORITY of roads and parks are locally managed.

It makes sense that an INTERSTATE freeway system would be federal.

National Parks make no sense to me at all.

yeah, education is the kind of thing that benefits everyone, as in the education of other people improves my life

I guess it's a little different for people whose agenda and worldview depends on ignorance though

good idea

let's also fund the military industrial complex that way

Why people always forget the might of the US .
Military !

And than I hear complain on central bank , education , health care fault for debts issues...

They did a good run , Eisenhower predicted 70 years ago , it took a long time but they finally took all the wealth .
Just prove how the US was strong then .

Equating "taxes" and "evil" certainly makes politics easy. Anything politically inconvenient and just go "people shouldn't be forced to pay for that".

People are paying, and they will keep paying. I'm sorry to be the bearer of hard news, but taxes aren't disappearing until our current states do the same (and even then, it is very unlikely that taxes would disappear).

This isn't asking for a free lunch, it's considering what ingredients to buy.

As I always say, you will never get the government to stop taxing more and spending more, so all you can do is trying to get them to spend it on things that are an investment in growing the society long term and benefit the people.

So even if you argue M4A is too expensive and the Green New Deal is too expensive, etc, etc, at least they will provide a return and dividend back to citizens for generations to come.

The sad thing is that citizens have basically largely given up and/or been convinced that gov't should give money back to the citizens. They have been slanders as 'freebee's' and forms of 'welfare' whenever the money goes to citizen priorities. And yet increase the military with much of that money going into an unknown void, or benefit corporations even as they shelter it offshore and that is ok.

IMO there is never a negative to force government to put money into things that build the economy and long term the country benefits massively (see New Deal).

Biden, if he grabs the Senate should push a legacy of massive investment in the US. Get the US back to leading infrastructure, M4A and other big and bold initiatives. I think it would allow the US to stave off (or at least have a fighting chance at doing so), the Chinese taking and holding the #1 world power spot for the next hundred years.

Yeah, he's not going to do anything like that.

Who gives a ****? We do this at the federal level, and it's good. A thing does not become good or bad based on being state, local, or federal.

+1
I thought taxe were evil anyway right ? regardless where they came from o0.

Arguing that the level of government determines the acceptability of the government action is an argument of charlatans. Basically no one adheres to those principles. The same people who argue that the federal government can't interfere when states impose voting restrictions to disenfranchise their voters because it's a LOCAL ISSUE are the same that think it's OK that the state government bans mask mandates when cities in that state try to implement them. It's bullshit. Either the thing is good, or it is bad. Maybe you have different principles and values that determine how you perceive good and band. But the level of government doing the thing is irrelevant to almost everyone, and the people who appeal to the level of government are almost always cowards who don't actually want to argue for or against the thing on its merits even though that's their principle objection.

+1

I'm kewl with cutting the military at least 50%

Really? I think public libraries are swell, but I don't want the Federal Government to mandate the salary of the librarian at my local library.

I agree with this lirvacat

Funny , once the country is poor its now your happy to get rid of your military ...
Was it worth it ?
Ending up with huge debts
High cost education
No health care for everyone .
What a paradis you live in ....

Hates education AND nature.