[armchairhacker]

We should teach people what we expect will be relevant in their lives, which includes basic math, science, government, history, and other subjects. Although some kids still won't learn, we should try. Anyone interested in a particular subject should be able to explore it further, since interest makes it relevant to them. And we should also give people mandatory but brief exposure to many difference fields, in case they become interested.

But at a certain point, you're wasting time and effort trying (and failing) to teach students what they're unlikely to, and ultimately won't, use afterward. "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink." Meanwhile, as GP noted, students who are interested in a "quality education" can't get one, because the quality is diminished by number of students, many who aren't interested. In order to provide the best education to the most people, we must optimize; cutting people who aren't learning means we can better educate those who are.

[ndsipa_pomu]

The key is to focus education on actual skill learning, rather than just focussing on exam preparation which is typically learning specific "magic" words and phrases (e.g. "condensation", "the powerhouse of the cell").

Learning specific physics formulas has its place, but learning the principles behind the formulas is far more valuable, though harder to measure.