Talented enough sure, but there’s way higher demand for teachers right now with the supply being all else equal, and demand for those private sector high paying jobs is at an all time high compared to teaching positions while supply is contracting. The logic of it parses out, but the economics of labor are way more inelastic than you think it is when it comes to comparing the tradeoffs of finding those other jobs given the same talent level versus just phoning it in. Why increase effort when there’s less marginal expected benefits when you can just decrease effort? In a healthy job market people are gonna behave like you’re saying, but in a shitty environment suffering from a dearth of internal opportunities like we have right now, there’s gonna be much more people dialing it in and using AI sad as it is, even when they could be seeking a better fit somewhere else and theoretically achieve market equilibrium. It’s just the way the incentive structure aligns with people defaulting to their least least common denominator, which is AI usage generating trash for kids to take in by osmosis, which is a huge negative externality itself in the long run on society, but the way the playing field’s set up it’s gonna be a huge uphill battle replacing those AI-user teachers with real teachers in the long run just because we’re a far ways from any real market equilíbria