The article had that vibe in it until the conculsions. The thesis is not to gut/avoid them entirely. Double-major, for example. Or allow that it's not worth taking out $250k in loans to get them, many people don't need to take them out. Fewer people will pursue these fields, but this might not reduce the quality of anyone's interaction with them, and possibly not the quantity either.
Teaching: we should pay more, but that's another story.
The type of people that get these degrees are the type that ultimately change society. STEM people help run the world with practical matters, but artists and such help us understand society, imagine what can be, and how to get along with each other. The degrees don't pay well, but the people that get them are extremely important to the world's well being and future.
I get it; many of these degrees are nice to have, but it's hard to justify their cost given their low job prospects. I know of a guy who got his degree in old English literature. He graduated with zero prospects. He decided to go into finance. He retired early as a millionaire. I know a guy who got a CS degree from Columbia. He has struggled in his career. He gets laid off or quits. The old English literature graduate is not the norm. He's astute and completely knew what he was getting into and dealt well with his situation. The CS guy has a hard time managing his situation, like many others. Ultimately, it comes down to the individual. Getting a degree is just the start of a working life. You need to fight for your desired job and not stop until you retire. That's what is ultimately important.
The world would be a noticeably worse place if people didn’t study many of these fields. It’s kind of a reverse John Lennon’s Imagine
Imagine a world with no artists, no actors, no journalists, no authors, no philosophers, no historians, no teachers, no social workers, etc etc
The article had that vibe in it until the conculsions. The thesis is not to gut/avoid them entirely. Double-major, for example. Or allow that it's not worth taking out $250k in loans to get them, many people don't need to take them out. Fewer people will pursue these fields, but this might not reduce the quality of anyone's interaction with them, and possibly not the quantity either. Teaching: we should pay more, but that's another story.
The type of people that get these degrees are the type that ultimately change society. STEM people help run the world with practical matters, but artists and such help us understand society, imagine what can be, and how to get along with each other. The degrees don't pay well, but the people that get them are extremely important to the world's well being and future.
The article makes the point that there are too many of them, which leads to low salaries.
You’re right but my point is that if we look through the lens of pure economics then the world would be a noticeably worse place.
I get it; many of these degrees are nice to have, but it's hard to justify their cost given their low job prospects. I know of a guy who got his degree in old English literature. He graduated with zero prospects. He decided to go into finance. He retired early as a millionaire. I know a guy who got a CS degree from Columbia. He has struggled in his career. He gets laid off or quits. The old English literature graduate is not the norm. He's astute and completely knew what he was getting into and dealt well with his situation. The CS guy has a hard time managing his situation, like many others. Ultimately, it comes down to the individual. Getting a degree is just the start of a working life. You need to fight for your desired job and not stop until you retire. That's what is ultimately important.
This is like all of them?
Everything except for STEM and then even some of those, basically.