I simply clarified the current state of affairs without saying a single negative word about it. Still, you rushed to defend it. It appears (just my guess) that you recognize flaws in the situation and feel compelled to justify it to yourself, don’t you?

As an engineer, I see both the advantages and drawbacks in what I described. The benefit is greater comfort and improved socialization for those who need it. The downside—and perhaps a critical one—is that a country neglecting its brightest students with no state support risks falling behind globally. That might not matter if we had no international rivals. But do we truly lack them?

> I simply clarified the current state of affairs without saying a single negative word about it.

It's awfully grandiose to present your experiences as a parent as the "current state of affairs" and a summary of all of California's approach to school psychology.

> Still, you rushed to defend it. It appears (just my guess) that you recognize flaws in the situation and feel compelled to justify it to yourself, don’t you?

I haven't defended it - I stated that the worldview you described makes me sad, and that I feel bad for the faculty and staff (treading water in this system that I agree is broken!) that I fear you are making it worse for. Do you psychoanalyze them with extreme confidence, also?

> As an engineer,

This was already very clear.

> that a country neglecting its brightest students

Ah - you've conveniently moved the goalposts: until now you were talking about teachers not providing "extra focus" or "exceptional" attention to the "exceptionally bright" students, and now it's "neglect." But the assertion here is that the bright students are still receiving the _required_ amount of attention, but someone else is receiving "extra," which is neglect (somehow). We're back at zero-sumness! This is what bums me out!

> That might not matter if we had no international rivals. But do we truly lack them?

what are you even talking about man how did you get here