A few days ago I quibbled with some aspects of Paul Krugman's New Yor Times Magazine article "The Tax-Cut Con." I think I was too harsh. The basic point of it is absolutely right: Conservatives, because they want to cut government drastically, have been selling us the big lie that we can cut taxes without curtailing services we want and need -- and we've been buying that lie.

Boy, have we ever. It's not just Alabama voting down a tax increase. Right-winger Cal Thomas gleefully recounts a few more victories in the anti-tax absolutists' jihad:

In San Diego, voters approved a "supermajority" requirement for any tax hikes in March, 2002; in Missouri, a large fuel and sales tax increase was defeated 3-1 in August, 2002; in Virginia, voters in several suburbs last November rejected a sales tax hike by an overall margin of 10 points. Just the other day, voters in Seattle, Wash., said no to what would have been the nation's first-ever espresso tax.

But Thomas says none of this will lead to disaster -- oh, no. He says everything can be hunky-dory if local governments are

encouraged to outsource more work that could be done by private industry and not state (and federal) government

(the private companies, I guess, will do this stuff for free), and he makes the following recommendations:

Local governments should be given the freedom to consolidate services with other towns and counties....

Texas is a good model for Alabama and other states. In Bowie County, Texas, the school transportation system is shared with a dozen other school districts. The Dallas County school district provides information technology services to 15 other districts. The overhead savings from these shared responsibilities can be large. The NTU [National Taxpayers Union] recommends an Inspector General process, modeled after the IGs at the federal level, who audit for waste, fraud and abuse. Montgomery County, Maryland's, IG (one of the first of its kind in the nation) has been analyzing about 500 county and school district programs for the last five years. For every dollar budgeted to the IG, the office has challenged almost $10 in costs.

Yeah, those changes should solve everything, right?

So why, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (scroll down), is Maryland facing a budget deficit of more than a billion dollars in fiscal 2004, and Texas a deficit of as much as $7.8 billon -- possibly a quarter of its state budget? Why isn't all that wonderful local sharing and auditing managing to relieve huge amounts of fiscal pressure on the states?

Meanwhile, USA Today reports on what happens when you cut what Thomas sneeringly calls "unnecessary spending":

At San Diego State University, fall "crashing" doesn't mean sneaking into a party. Rather it means attending an already-full class in hopes of winning a seat and entry into a course needed for graduation. While students always crash popular classes, this year more are rushing to complete requirements so they will graduate in four years.

The reasons behind the limited availability of courses are obvious and evident on many public university campuses. Bruising state budget cuts to higher-education funding are shrinking class offerings and putting students in a double financial bind. First, they face rising tuitions: 40% this year in California; 15% over two years in Virginia; 40% over three years in Iowa. Then, students closed out of required courses because of limited offerings face the prospect of paying for summer terms or extra semesters.

Already, the average student at a four-year public university graduates with $16,000 in debt. An extra year adds $4,500, excluding lost wages or living expenses. And summer courses can run $150 a credit hour....

Education, schmeducation. Just cut taxes!