People who know there are vast differences in how individual children learn and what can happen when learning is then matched to those specific children, who have the means (and family setup) to homeschool are doing so. I see that building into a group of highly capable children, later adults, who have every advantage vs. those who got the vanilla version of education.
Homeschooling is not a status symbol of wealth. Some people make huge sacrifices to homeschool, in some cases this may include schooling during evening hours and on weekends, cooperatively "babysitting" other families' children, etc.
Meanwhile these people continue to fund the "vanilla version of education" which is provided free, from kindergarten through high school graduation (12th grade), through public schools in the USA.
Families with children attending private, independent, or parochial schools also continue to pay for public schools.
It's not good from a societal standpoint, imo.
If you mean that allowing people to leave public schools in order to homeschool is not good for society, I strongly disagree. Keeping homeschooling as a legal option in the USA is key. Homeschooling demonstrates that children can learn well and be successful, often without having their lessons orchestrated by a highly credentialed professional. Homeschooling often raises the bar, as do private, independent, and parochial schools. If government had the monopoly on education, by eliminating other alternatives to public schools, this would considerably restrict freedom, strike at the the role of the family as the key building block of society, challenge the authority of parents, and restrain intellectual curiosity (by making "plain vanilla" the only educational option).
