I think this analogy to capitalism pretty much applies to education, too.
Student A is given a healthy home, good food, adequate medical care, a computer, internet access, books galore from birth, educational games, trips, plenty of discussion and questioning with adults, educational TV programmes, museum visits, art gallery visits, pencils, paper, felts, toys that encourage creativity and experimentation, and more.
Student B has poor housing, inadequate health care, few if any books, few if any educational toys, few if any educational visits, little if any discussion and questioning with adults, non-educational TV programmes, few if any visits to museums or galleries, and little chance to explore, create and experiment.
Student B usually loses the testing and exam race compared with Student A.
At which point student B and his teachers are deemed to have been lazy. Or useless. Or both.
At this point, those in Student A’s world push for more tests. Tests that their companies will benefit from but which do nothing to help the student B.
And the cycle continues.
Rigged game, much?