It&#x27;s not necessarily wrong to teach to population averages.<p>It sounds like you&#x27;re suggesting that education effort&#x2F;money should be distributed with an emphasis on high-aptitude students instead of low-aptitude students for long-term growth goals. This makes some sense, it seems likely that empowering high-aptitude students with better education will generate leaders, entrepreneurs, inventors, 10x engineers, and &quot;growth&quot;.<p>But if you don&#x27;t spend the extra money and effort to teach the low-aptitude students, they will not have a usable education, producing a &quot;low aptitude class&quot;, likely condemned to poverty, unemployment, and suffering.<p>Growth is great, but suffering is not.  Maybe the bureaucracy swings too far towards preventing suffering at the expense of future growth, but it&#x27;s not a black-and-white wrong.