I've heard this question and similar questions asked a lot. I would just like to take a moment to address this, as it raises a valid point. Normally, tax dollars go to (or are supposed to go to) something that will benefit everyone, but if you have no children yet you're paying taxes that fund public schools, are you receiving any benefit?
The answer: yes.
Why?
Those children, those offspring of strangers who you don't give a damn about, they grow up. Plenty of them will end up incarcerated or in dead end jobs or what have you. However, some of them will succeed. They will change the world for the better, and in doing so will directly benefit you. Don't believe me? The fact that you're reading this in the first place should be sufficient to dispel that skepticism. Do you think this magic box in your hand or on your desk would exist without people educated by the public schools?
It goes beyond just technology. Nearly aspect of modern life that we all take for granted came about at least in part thanks to people who were educated in public schools. When you pay for those children you don't care about, you're paying for then to grow up and invent a device, cure a disease, or do something else that will have a positive impact on your life.
Where would our society be if we didn't have public schools? If society were there, where would you be?
Tl;dr: You should be alright with paying to educate other people's children because a well-educated population benefits everyone. You need to be able to look beyond the few cents less your paycheck is worth and see the big picture.
EDIT: everyone is now against public schools apparently.
-
A scenario: A scheme is put in place whereby you can stop paying your taxes and in return you cannot use any service for which those taxes would be paying. Roads, schools, emergency services, government services etc. You take this offer as you do not like the idea of paying for other people's advancement. There are private sector options that you can pay for and you carry on your life pretty much as normal. At some point down the line though you contract a nasty disease, a disease that through one reason or another, only 1 doctor has the specific knowledge and experience needed to successfully treat the disease. Here's the thing: the doctor is only paid via government taxes, and refuses to treat you (ignoring the Hippocratic oath for a minute here) on the grounds that since you did not pay into the system that gave them their knowledge and experience, you bet on the wrong horse and as a result, you simply don't deserve the treatment that someone who had paid their taxes does. How do you feel?