But substitute any big feat done for the first time: iPhone taking control from the carriers, or Y Combinator being successful by funding a bunch a little companies. The point is it was harder to do because they were the first.
And educational opportunities are abundant in the US, regardless of where you live. The limiting factor is more likely you don't know how to access them. Which would change if you were around people who did.
Suppose we were to send in people to help everyone in the US to access all the educational opportunities that are available to them. This would still be a USA in which public schools are funded by regional property taxes — and thus a USA in which the schools in the poorest neighborhoods get a small fraction of the funding of the schools in the richest neighborhoods. Surely, then, average outcomes would still differ radically by region.
I think you've got a very good point at its core — people are heavily influenced by what they see around them; and, even keeping education expenditure distributed as-is, people can make a huge difference in others' lives by showing a good example and by passing on information on how to achieve in spite of circumstances. A limiting factor is lack of understanding on how to get ahead, yes — but, statistically, that seems likely to be only a small part of the story.
But only because someone wants you to be happy, doesn't mean they know what will make you happy, e.g. religious parents wanting their children to embrace the same beliefs.
But substitute any big feat done for the first time: iPhone taking control from the carriers, or Y Combinator being successful by funding a bunch a little companies. The point is it was harder to do because they were the first.
And educational opportunities are abundant in the US, regardless of where you live. The limiting factor is more likely you don't know how to access them. Which would change if you were around people who did.