> they meet the standards of meritocracy better than their peers, and are thus worthy of the status they inherit. Or maybe the education system ended up being

> they meet the standards of meritocracy better than their peers, and are thus worthy of the status they inherit. Or maybe the education system ended up being tailored for well minded people, and not for the others ? Education involves a lot of human interaction, it's pretty difficult to teach and learn. > Neither has plausible ideas for what to do about it. The purpose of education, in my mind, is to lift people out of poverty by just teaching them a job that their parents don't have any relationship with, and will never have. If you put competition in something that is made to reduce inequality, you will be disappointed. Maybe expensive schools should be taxed to fund more public schools too. There's a student loan bubble, so why not tax it to fund community colleges ? To be honest, I live in france, I think the problem with the US education system is what the education quality students are exposed to from age of 8 to 16. I think it's very heterogeneous in the US, and that might be the source of the problem.