pvl@houxh.UUCP (P.LAMASTER) (11/03/83)
There's an aspect of earmarking taxes that I haven't yet seen addressed. It's not clear to me that a given activity should receive funding in direct proportion to the importance I give it. Some things inherently cost more than others and would need a higher degree of funding to sustain a comparable level of activity. It would be too easy for "the people" to mandate that a given level of money be given to a project when the project couldn't usefully absorb that much. The result would be akin to cancer research: (hope I don't step on toes here) work that wasn't related would be advertised as such so funding could be gotten. Pete LaMaster NJ ..ihnp4!houxh!pvl (201)949-0040