Paying your fair share of taxes is not the problem here.
I'd disagree. I see the point that you're making- that it's the use (and the people) that spawns the waste.
Let's look at it from a different perspective. If you were paying a utility for a service, and they squandered the monies that had been paid, but didn't have the money left to provide you with your basic services, what would be your option? You'd switch.
Our government is not able to provide basic services- in some cases schools are having budgets cut because the local municipality doesn't have the money, and the government investment has gone down. But the library next door has a $25,000 router needlessly, that could have funded some of the programs that were cut.
What are your options? You don't have the option as you do with the utility, i.e. put your money somewhere that better makes use of the funds. You don't have the option with Social Security to put your money somewhere that you will be able to make use of it when you need it rather than trust that it will be there, even when all indications point to 'no'.
That's why I think that paying your fair share comes into the equation.
That's the main reason why I don't respond to RFPs from government (or non-profits) any more. Too many "cozy arrangements" and "unvoiced understandings" lurking inside the process. Most times, the preferred vendor has already been selected. The RFP 'cattle call' is only to secure the requisite number of "additional competitive bids" (as required by law) before awarding the contract to the party they originally intended to hand it to.
I found that out the hard way after spending several hours, and not a few dollars to come up with a competitive proposal for a couple of RFPs. The same people would win... and I also found out that if you curried favor with those people, you could get some of the 'subcontracts' before hand.