Yeah, but that would have cost the taxpayers even more than a Pell Grant.
We've got more than enough people who joined for the college money, thanks.
While you are right in a sense that the logic of investing in people's educations, if taken to an extreme, could be uesd to justify all sorts of things, I think it is one of the smartest things we do.
A more educated citizenry benefits society far beyond how much money you can make off of taxing them. This is especially true in light of how poorly our public schools perform at preparing kids to be adults (which is also taxpayer supported).
Whereas most welfare, subsidies, and handouts are for the benefit of individuals, I think a strong case could be made that supporting the education of others is an investment that benefits all of us.
As for where to draw the line, common sense will have to come into play. Worrying about what a certain strand of logic can do if taken to an absolute extreme can destroy every good idea there is.
So you would agree with the Democrats that we ought to spend more to hire and train better teachers? You would agree with the democrats that we ought to spend more on better schools? After all, you are repeating the same logic they use to justify their education programs.
Bottom line, support for pell grants equals support for confiscating money from tax payers so that it can be given out to others rather than allowing it to be spent by those who earned it.
If you think that governmentt is better capable of spending your money then you are, then you aren't a Conservative.
Those that are defending the Pell Grant program are making the case that it is moral, and to our benefit to confiscate money from hard working americans so that it can be given to those who are unwilling to pay their own way through college. I don't see how you can justify your support for this on any ground.