Oh, I always check.
What bugs me about the perms, though, is how little they actually say.
Often, you get things like "Can read SMS", "Can make phone calls", "Can read Contacts", and so on - but no explanation as to why.
I'd like to see the permissions expanded, with a justification and use statement attached to each requested permission, the use statement being binding within the vendor's (and ideally emptor's) jurisdiction, and certainly within Google's. For example: if an application states that it wants access to Contacts, it must explain why, and what's being done with the data. So, if it says it's in order to update Contacts from scanned business cards (for instance), then that's the only thing it can do with the data - it can't read all my Contacts and send their contents to its Mothership for "marketing" purposes.
Google can use Terms and Conditions requiring full and complete disclosure in this way to enforce punitive action. Offenders giving false statements and abusing user data can be ejected from Android Market, any unpaid royalties forfeited (ideally to the Free Software Foundation, or a portfolio of charities), existing users refunded and the application quarantined (with consent) on user devices - without limitation of any other recourses Google, or Android users, might take.
Is this unreasonable?
Remember, the window of opportunity is now. If we don't act to enforce our rights to privacy of our personal data whilst we can, we won't have any.