[blacksmith_tb]

That appears to be a false equivalency, Yao Ming doesn't "value" being tall, he is tall. Parents who don't value education may be crappy parents, or they may be hard-eyed realists who think nothing will better the lot of their children. But it's in the interest of a society to not have large numbers of uneducated and angry young people causing havoc.

[prottog]

I don't know that society can handle a government large enough to ensure that large numbers of uneducated and angry young people do not exist, if the majority of parents do not care to educate their children. Put another way, I'm advocating for policy that incentivizes parents to be good parents, instead of one that raises children in their stead if they fail to be good parents.

[bsder]

> if the majority of parents do not care to educate their children.

I don't agree that this is true. I might agree that a majority of parents now don't understand how to educate their children or have the excess capacity to do so.

Reading to your child means that you have literacy above your child as well as having time. Doing well in school presupposes that your parents know how to do well in school. Navigating bureaucracy is a skill learned by the upper-middle class and above.

Working the system is difficult when you spend most of your time simply trying to avoid having that system grind you apart.

Providing a public education to everyone is how society can help ameliorate some of those issues. It also is the most cost effective by a long, long margin.