I don't agree that the government has no obligation to provide for members of society (and neither would one who wants free government land and/or annual dividend payments I assume). I  thought we would prevail given the Constitutional mandate for the state "to establish and maintain" public schools; however, the Supreme Court didn't see it that way perhaps because of how the challenge was presented.  So, it is what it is.  My point is to first quit assuming that the only control on spending is available revenue and to have some sense of priority.  We can't establish that priority if those in power refuse to open the forum of debate.