https://www.axios.com/2023/01/08/public-school-enrollment-decline A couple key points, the students in question haven't just DISAPPEARED. They've just left public schools for other types of educational opportunities. This could be a private school, charter school or home school. The number of students taking advantage of those types of educational opportunities doubled to five million. The "why it matters" is because when those who can FLEE do so, the funding leaves. Even if it doesn't go to the new place, it leaves the public school and the students being serviced by that school are now proclaimed to have a disadvantage. There is a strange sort of paradoxical argument put forward that the students who cannot flee public schools are at a disadvantage since they cannot flee and likewise are also at a disadvantage because others have fled public schools. Why do you think this argument is being made both ways? What does it say about a public service when people flee it and refuse to use it even when from their perspective it is free and local? The article notes this trend is slated to continue to progress. The article notes several problems, learning loss, students being at a disadvantage, students fleeing to alternatives, public schools being closed but treats all of this as a bad thing. Why is it a bad thing? Why is it not a good thing that schools that do not educate are being closed and students are fleeing from them? Instead of simply noting they are leaving and where they are going instead, why do they not ask why public schools should not change and adapt to students and investigate why they prefer the other solutions even if they have to pay out of pocket for them?