Of course there's a ton of bloat in the budget. But once we've pared down that money (if we could pare it down -- bureaucrats have been promising to do so forev

Of course there's a ton of bloat in the budget. But once we've pared down that money (if we could pare it down -- bureaucrats have been promising to do so forever, but it just gets worse), there are other ways to spend the money that would be more effective. It's a question of the opportunity cost: spending the money here means that it's not available to spend elsewhere. We must choose the most effective way to spend it. We could install those seat belts on every bus in the nation, but that would cost hundreds of millions (and the article quotes information indicating that it might actually be counterproductive anyway, but set that aside for this argument). But that money could instead be invested in finding a cure for some childhood disease, or building a poison treatment center, or better law enforcement to keep some drunks off the road, and on and on. It seems to me that any of my suggestions are likely to save more than six lives a year, so why would you want to invest that money on something that is going to do less good?