If the question is about the taxpayer’s role in an activity, the answer is generally “most taxpayers.” That is because many taxpayer-sponsored activities are non-profit, charitable, educational, and/or governmental.
Yes, this is not a question about the taxpayers role in an activity. This question is about the people who should be the beneficiaries. This question can be answered by the fact that a lot of politicians are involved in activities that have other people in them to be the beneficiaries.
In the case of taxpayer-sponsored educational activities, politicians often vote for the interests of the people they represent. In other words, they are the ones who set the agenda, and they are the ones who decide what is taught and who receives credit or blame for it. For example, in the case of taxpayer-funded science education, politicians vote for the scientific facts and the findings of the scientific community, and therefore they deserve credit for the knowledge they teach.
The problem, of course, is that those who are funded for the purposes of those programs are the ones who have to take the credit for the findings of the scientific community. In the case of the tax-funded education, scientists are the ones who are supposed to get the best results. In the case of the scientific community, these scientists are supposed to be better than the other scientists, and they are.
The problem is that there is not a lot of money to be had by the scientific community. There are, however, some that are funded by the research community that they have to pay. For example, the project that’s funded by the University of Utah is funded by the National Science Foundation. I know that the Science Foundation is a great thing, but it’s not the only thing that’s funded by the scientific community. There are some that are funded by other funding sources.
If the National Science Foundation is funded by the University of Utah, then the researchers that work on their research projects are also participants. If they are not then they have to pay their own way. The problem is that there is not enough money available to pay for all the scientists that work on research projects. The project funded by the National Science Foundation is called UO-IRB which stands for “Unobligated Research.” The University is not required to pay.
There are a number of reasons for this, one being that the UO is a huge research institution and so if the researchers were allowed to choose, they might prefer to pursue a much larger project that is less likely to fall through the cracks. Another reason is that the UO has a big endowment fund that is not necessarily used for research in the sense that the fund is not used to pay for the salaries of faculty members. In fact, the University has no such endowment fund.
We would be wise to create a way for the UO to fund research on a variety of topics. We can spend money on the UO for doing research, but if we’re a research company, it’ll be much more expensive to fund research than it is to fund a research lab or a university.
The problem with such a plan is that it will be very complicated to administer and will cost a lot of money. I don’t know of any other taxpayer willing to risk their money on such a proposal.
My thoughts are that you might be able to find another way to get involved. You could create a special fund for research on something you really care about, and give it to a university or other entity to administer. You could simply donate money to a university to do research on it.