Whooping cranes mean more than people.

[capt coonassty]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

You missed my point. My point was that license fees and taxes paid on sporting equipment should be focused on benefits for the taxpayers who paid those taxes. You are more than welcome to go to the LA Legislature and request funds for WC and the other 75% of species from the general fund.

But consider your own reasoning too. Why are 90% of species "doomed" unless megabucks are spent on their management? Why do 90% of species in Louisiana need expensive government programs?

When I was trained as a hunter's ed instructor, they emphasized how license fees and P-R funds go into supporting wildlife management and how much hunters and anglers benefit from these funds being invested in good management. This pitch seems dishonest if most P-R funds and license revenues are diverted toward programs which do not directly benefit those paying the taxes and fees. Benefiting other wildlife is a fine and noble goal, which I support. But why should this burden fall disproportionately on hunters and anglers?

So why should my tax dollars go to schools if I don't have kids? Me paying for education doesn't benefit me directly. (I know it does, just don't have a better example to make my point)

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by capt coonassty

So why should my tax dollars go to schools if I don't have kids? Me paying for education doesn't benefit me directly. (I know it does, just don't have a better example to make my point)

Public education has gotten so poor and the return for tax dollars is so low, that a case can be made for elimination of public education.

Capitalism did a much better job with health care, why not give the free enterprise system a chance to fix education?