Re the title: yes, and no. At first glance it seems alarmist, but if you take into account the wider implications (no exposure to free alternatives, extra cost

Re the title: yes, and no. At first glance it seems alarmist, but if you take into account the wider implications (no exposure to free alternatives, extra cost to a population mired in poverty, and general lack of exposure to IT for large parts of the population), it's not too far from the truth. Funding for the education department has been increased drastically over the last decade or so, but misappropriation of funds, mismanagement, corruption, ineptitude, geographical separation, lack of proper oversight, and just the sheer pressure on the system in terms of the amount of learners it needs to support means this is just another thing that reduces the value for the learners from tax money.