but wouldn't state education improve if it was better funded?<<

In my opinion, no. State mandated education already spends between $6000-$10,000 per pupil in the USA. They are staffed by state-educated teachers indoctrinated into "Whole Language" and "Fuzzy New-New Math" and school as socialization rather than cognitive development. Frankly, I think they produce illiterates and ill-formed citizens. Pouring more money into that system is folly, IMO.

I sent my son to a private school, not an 'elite' one, but a good one, with old-school philosophy of reading and math, cost = $6000 per year.

It is very common to believe that education is poor because it is under-funded. This is not true, in my opinion. 

In my experience, public schools only become "good" when there is intense parental and cluster-passion involved. In other words, when the community puts human capital into the public school as if it were a private one, or co-op one. These excellent public schools do NOT get more taxpayer funding than the run-of-the-mill middling public school, yet the results are far better.

So, Gates simply "dumping money" into public education in my opinion is enabling. Now, I do not actually know the facts of the type of education he is funding. If he is somehow insisting on "money will flow if the school commits to excellence", or is providing voucher money for parents to make a choice, that would be interesting.

::::: Opera :::::