
A College Degree Is No Guarantee of a Good Life - pseudolus
https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2020/07/will-going-college-make-you-happier/613729/
======
vaidhy
I have been reading through the comments and I am very curious about a few
things -

1\. What "bullshit" degrees people are talking about? Are they the liberal
arts studies? If so, as a society do we not see value in the fine arts?
Expertise in music, language, anthropology, history, etc do not necessarily
lead to a well-paying job.. but they give intellectually satisfaction in and
of itself.

2\. IMHO, the pay you are likely to earn should never be a judge of value of a
degree. A degree gives you an opportunity to learn something in depth. As long
as you are able to reach that, the degree is valuable. The sad part of being
in US (and other places) is that the depth is not valued. Trying college fees
to ability to earn is an incorrect optimization.

3\. If I were a poet, an author or a painter, do you think I should expect
that I will be able to pursue my passion on a nominal pay (maybe as a
teacher/tutor, basic income from government etc)? Most of the "golden age of
civilizations" had this property. When everyone needs to fight for survival,
that reflects poorly on the state of things and it is more of a dog eat dog
world.

~~~
diebeforei485
The arts (orchestra/symphony, opera/musicals, etc) are a luxury good. There is
a small, niche market for these things, mostly centered around certain cities
- so we can only have so many artists.

The mass arts that the masses can afford to consume (TV, streaming music, and
movies) are by definition based on popularity, so we can only have so many
artists.

I don't know why we fund so many people's arts degrees. We need less funding
for arts degrees, and more funding for the arts instead. Someone being able to
live a basic (but self-sufficient) life has nothing to do with funding arts
degrees.

~~~
pixelbash
This is a viewpoint centered around seeing art as a commodity. To me that's
like saying we only need so many scientists. Is perceived value the best
metric?

~~~
weatherman2
There's a lot of art out there in the world. A whole, whole lot.

If you want to make something artistically creative for people to watch,
listen to, or read, you are competing with Mozart, the Beatles, Edgar Allen
Poe, Tolkien, and countless other prodigies. Artistic creations made by
individuals are a winner-takes-all market where a small fraction of the
creators enjoy the majority of the revenue. Artistic creations made by large
groups are somewhat fairer (but still often on the low end) in their
compensation, if you manage to out compete other job applicants and get the
job.

Regardless of whether you as an individual treat art as a commodity, you have
to square your viewpoint as a artist with the fact that you have to put bread
on the table. Society will very likely reward you very poorly for your
artistic contributions.

------
omginternets
I barely skimmed the article, but I don't find this surprising for a few
reasons (some of which have been mentioned elsewhere in the comments):

\- "University degree" is a heterogeneous thing. While there is such thing as
non-economic value, the strictly _economic_ value of a college education tends
to cluster around a small subset of degrees.

\- Many countries have enacted policies to increase proportion of people who
get degrees. Far from fixing inequality, this has instead diluted the value of
university degrees.

\- All universities are not created equal. While it is possible (and even
common) for employers to pay too much attention to the reputation of the
school, it is also quite common for students to over-estimate the value of a
no-name institution. I've found this to be moreso the case in the two European
countries I've lived in for an extended period of time (France & England).

\- The exorbitant debt incurred by university tuition in some countries (which
need not be named, I think) means the ROI on the university degree has to also
be exorbitant.

Have I missed anything?

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _Far from fixing inequality_

Was this the purpose? I thought it was to raise living standards by improving
productivity. By and large, broader education has been successful at that. (It
went off the deep end, in recent years, with the proliferation of bullshit
degrees.)

~~~
csharptwdec19
I think you covered part of the problem in the second half of your statement.

In the US, part of the problem is that by making education debts non-
dischargable in bankruptcy, and by the aforementioned proliferation of degrees
that may qualify as 'nice to have' rather than 'increase earning potential'.

The end result is a lot of people who got a college degree that doesn't really
pay for itself, and instead leads to 20+ years of debt, or 10 years of
indentured servitude to a non-profit.

~~~
bhupy
Making education debts dischargeable in bankruptcy sounds good in theory, but
against what collateral do you take out a college loan? Most bankruptcy
includes collateral liquidation. What's to stop someone from obtaining a
useless degree that doesn't contribute to the nation's economy, and then
discharges the debt in bankruptcy?

I think a big part of the problem is that debt is so readily issued for
degrees that overwhelmingly leave the recipient incapable of providing for
society in gainful ways.

~~~
simplify
> What's to stop someone from obtaining a useless degree that doesn't
> contribute to the nation's economy, and then discharges the debt in
> bankruptcy?

Nothing, and that's exactly why education debts need to be dischargeable like
anything else.

Dischargeable loans makes loan companies have actual responsibility and
consequences in deciding who to give loans to. Otherwise, they blindly give
out loans (why not, there's no risk!), putting all that much money in the
system, which college institutions are happy to absorb in higher tuition.

~~~
AuryGlenz
But it could lead to plenty of people making the smart decision to file for
bankruptcy even when they have a good degree. Bankruptcy at 22 isn’t that big
of a deal, generally.

I’m not sure what the answer is, though I think an economic approach is key.

~~~
simplify
Bankruptcy negatively affects your credit score by a large amount, so it's not
exactly an easy decision.

~~~
lozaning
It would be a very easy decision I think. Can you rebuild your credit in less
time than it would take you to pay off your loans?

If you're still going to be paying your loan off in 7 years, bankruptcy would
be an easy choice.

~~~
simplify
What if you need do anything significant with your money in those 7 years?
Like rent an apartment? Have a car to get to work?

The debt doesn't just magically go away. Chapter 7 requires liquidating
assets, and chapter 13 requires paying some loans back anyway. And besides, I
don't see why loan companies couldn't require cosigners to reduce risk on
these college loans.

~~~
bobbydroptables
>Like rent an apartment? Have a car to get to work?

Then you rent an apartment or buy a car. Are you implying you can't do this
after bankruptcy? It's much easier to do these with a bankruptcy on your
"record" than with a $1000 monthly payment.

~~~
simplify
I'm implying that these things are affected by your credit score.

~~~
lozaning
Cash is King

If you've got an 800 score and no money, no one will give you a loan. If
you've got a trash credit score, but an extra $1000 that isn't going to loans,
then you can 'afford' to get fleeced on 36% 72 month auto loans for 7 years
until your credit is rebuilt.

~~~
bhupy
Depending on the market, I can’t imagine it being easy/straightforward for
someone with “trash credit” to find a landlord willing to lease an apartment
at the market-rate.

That $1000 is likely getting spent no matter what, either in repaying loans,
or paying a premium over the market rate to get a landlord to agree to lease
you an apartment instead of someone with an 800 score.

------
mcguire
" _Higher education is often described as an investment. But it’s still
unclear if it pays off in happiness._ "

Nothing, _nothing_ will guarantee happiness. Or a good life.

Make the best decisions you can, by which I mean try to make decisions that
you will not regret later. (Have I made a crap-ton of mistakes in my life?
Sure 'nuff. Would I make different decisions if I could, even knowing what I
know now? Probably not.)

And for the love of Pete, stop denigrating those who have made different
choices. Sure, it may make you feel better about your situation temporarily,
but it is very, very unappealing.

~~~
jimbokun
In high school, I had a part time job planting trees, but knew I was going to
a university that I was proud to get accepted to and excited to have that
opportunity. But kind of thinking maybe I shouldn't brag about that to the
other kids who were doing this same job, but wouldn't have the same
opportunities for higher education as myself.

Then one day, the subject came up, and the other guys were like "Thank god I'm
graduating and won't have to waste any more time reading and studying and
sitting in a classroom. I can work outside and make money instead."

And I realized not everyone's path to happiness is the same.

On the flip side:

I spent another summer working with a couple older gentlemen driving a
tractor. I said something like "This isn't so bad, working outside, breathing
fresh air."

They told me in no uncertain terms "Get a job doing something in an office
with air conditioning, you don't want to still be out here doing this when
you're our age."

~~~
opportune
The best job I ever had was life guarding a pool barely anybody used. 70% of
the time it was empty and I just browsed my phone. It paid $9.25/hr. Some of
the other lifeguards were in their 60s or 30s and as a college student, at
first I was judging them a little that they were doing such a menial job in
their prime earning years.

Then I realized that if they were happy with their current standard of living
their life probably had no work related stress whatsoever and they kinda had
it figured out. Now I make over 10x more and am constantly stressed out and
anxious taking my work home with me everywhere, and I envy those people quite
a bit.

~~~
nevertoolate
Find a job which pays you enough and you are not over stressed. If your job is
too hard for you at the moment you need to find a way to be able to improve
your skills

------
mindvirus
There's so much potential in a better university/college.

Imagine that in society we pooled our resources to make the best video/online
courses for a variety of subjects. The best CS courses. The best history
courses. The best biology courses. We could focus on making the courses
accessible and translated. We could make the best assignments and projects,
iterated and experimented on with a population of millions. Heck, we could
even hire professional actors that would both help with engagement and with
representation problems in various fields.

Then in addition to being places of research, universities become the places
we go to facilitate taking those courses and applying the knowledge. Watch the
interactive videos, and expert tutors help you understand challenging topics,
guide you where to look next, and facilitate labs. At least for undergraduate,
this seems much better than what we have now.

And then, why not open it up to everyone? We could all take various courses
throughout our lives. I'd love to be continuously taking classes in new
fields, but the world isn't set up that way.

~~~
dumbfoundded
I think the real value of a university is the community. What you're
describing is basically a new textbook. It doesn't replace the people you
interact with. Going to a great college doesn't mean great classes with
awesome course material. It's other classmates you study with, it's the TAs
that hold office hours, the professors too, sometimes.

~~~
marcusverus
There's no reason that this couldn't work via an online community. Online
courses don't do anything to foster this kind of connection, because they have
always been a lazy facsimile of the in-person college course experience. If
they tried, online courses could easily foster these kinds of relationships
and unlock a ton of potential.

I also think that this is a larger societal problem that should be but has not
been addressed by social networking apps. There are no social networks that
are designed to foster communication about highly specific ideas. Sure I can
go to r/history to find people who are generally interested in history, but
where can I go to find people who would be interested in book-clubbing G.J.
Meyer's 'A World Undone'? If I want to talk about physics _in general_ , I
could go to /r/physics. But how do I find physicists who want to discuss
matter-antimatter asymmetry? You can glom on to conversations in current
social networks, but there is no way to start/find/subscribe to discussions
about very specific subject matter.

Point being, rather than saying that the IRL personal interactions at college
are a reason why the current model is ideal, we could do a lot of good by
figuring out how to port that experience A) onto online courses, and B) onto
the world at large.

~~~
tracker1
My only counter to that is socialization in person is a lot different than
socialization online... I notice that from my daughter to a lot of younger
people in general that spend more time interacting online or via phone apps
vs. in person have far more anxiety regarding interactions in person.

As to TFA, I think that for a lot of people trade schools are a better option,
and should often be encouraged. I'd like to see more general education
regarding retirement planning etc as well earlier on, as this is a place a lot
of people get stuck, esp. in the US.

Another issue is that people should be guided towards educational paths that
have demand in the workplace. Does it make sense to go 200k into debt for a
job that pays 38k/year, or graduate 10k students for a career path with only
100 openings. Some of this onus is on the students and parents, but the
schools themselves could do much better with this. Some reform on funding
might help, but it's a touchy subject.

~~~
wolco
The opposite is true as well. Those who face to face have far more anxiety
communicating online with peers.

------
technothrasher
The four years I spent at my university were four of the best years of my
life. I grew academically, socially, and career-wise in ways I just never
would have without going to school. However, I have plenty of friends that
never went to any higher education than high school, or who dropped out of
college early on, and it's not like they're unsuccessful or maladjusted. It
seems pretty clear that different paths work for different people.

~~~
non-entity
Yeah, as much as I hate the university as an institution, they're still
necessary for a large amount of people (in practice) These threads tend to be
filled with comments that assume everyone is a developer and / or should be.
Unfortunately many, if not most high paying jobs will still require higher
education, particularly the stereotypically well paying ones. You aren't going
to become a doctor, engineer (non software), lawyer, etc. without that degree
unfortunately.

~~~
randomdata
_> Unfortunately many, if not most high paying jobs will still require higher
education, particularly the stereotypically well paying ones._

Not just any higher education, though, but specific professional degrees that
grant access to supply managed markets. That part seems to be often missed
when this topic comes up.

I recall a Gallup study into the top 1% finding that something like 70% of the
top 1% have a professional degrees (doctors, lawyers, etc.). The remaining
portion was comprised of more people with high school or less than those with
only a bachelor degree, suggesting that a bachelor degree alone does nothing
to improve your prospects. Which goes against the common thinking.

But is also echoed in the general economy. With the rise of post-secondary
attainment, incomes have held stagnant. If there was a financial advantage
gained though higher education itself, not through supply management, incomes
would be rising.

------
mac01021
The article spends a little time, in the middle on the headline assertion
"College does not guarantee Happiness"

But spends more time on an anecdote about the author's son to demonstrate that
"Happiness is possible without College", which is a different matter entirely.
And one would hope the latter is true, since 2/3 of the US population does not
attend college.

~~~
astura
I agree.

This article is very light on content and I'm kinda surprised something this
banal and content-less even made it to an actual publication.

Also, the guy's son graduated high school two years ago, he's 20-21 years old,
practically everyone is happy at that age, let's hear about his life
satisfaction at 40. That's ignoring the fact that two years is hardly enough
time to evaluate the long term outcome of a major life decision.

To be clear, I don't think the author's son will grow up to be miserable, like
the parent pointed out, most people don't have a college degree and most
people aren't miserable. But this should be obvious.

~~~
mac01021
But then

"It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to
be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig,
is of a different opinion, it is only because they only know their own side of
the question."

    
    
       -- J S Mill

~~~
projektfu
I think as time goes on, I am learning that humans are dissatisfied because
they no longer know how to live the life of a human, where (wild) pigs are
fully capable of living the life of a pig. The big eye-opener for me was "The
Story of B", by Daniel Quinn. Say what you want about the completeness or
quality of its anthropology, it has touched on an ineffable fact that we are
constantly trying to use more of what is bad for us to try to make it good.

------
zuhayeer
"Some kids think they know what they want to do after college, but others
don’t, so for them college is like buying an expensive insurance policy"

Expensive is an understatement. At the same time, being unsure of what you
want to do before college _is_ what makes it a great place to sow the seeds
for what you do in life. Funnily enough that happens mostly outside of class
through people you meet and projects you work on.

Since the physical aspect of college is in question this upcoming year, I feel
that it isn't worth it. You can probably do a lot of school without actually
paying tuition, and find new ways to meet people and work on projects.

------
DoreenMichele
I passed up a National Merit Scholarship that would have let me go away to
school and attend one of the big two colleges in my home state. Instead, I
attended a local college for two years, living at my parents, taking whatever
federal grant money was available and my parents covered the rest, in part
because going to the local college kept tuition and other expenses reasonable.

(I'm 55. Tuition has changed in the decades since and this approach might no
longer work. It did at the time.)

I then dropped out without a degree and did the military wife thing for a lot
of years. I returned to school when I knew what I wanted to do, career-wise.

I made that decision in part because I was personally acquainted with two
people who each had a bachelor's degree (and more schooling beyond that -- one
was two quarters short of a master's and the other was working on his second
bachelor's) and were financially dependent on someone else while they
delivered newspapers (one also spent some time selling shoes and he eventually
killed himself).

One was in his thirties and living with his mother. The other was mooching off
a wife at the time who eventually left him.

So I was never fooled into believing that a college degree guarantees you a
successful professional career. I felt I could deliver newspapers for a living
without a college degree and I would be better off if I had such a job without
being saddled with college debts like at least one of these two men was.

I don't regret my decision. Given the details of my life, I think I made the
right choice.

We need to do a better job of educating young people about when it makes sense
to go to school. Far too many people seem to think a degree is a magic wand
and don't understand what else needs to happen to establish a career,
especially one that pays well enough to justify taking on student debt.

~~~
supernova87a
Wait, if you're 55 now, you grew up in basically the golden age of US growth
and the easy value of a college degree at relatively cheap tuition. And you
had friends back then who were saddled with college debt that led to dead end
jobs?

The situation, is way, way worse now. Orders of magnitude worse.

~~~
DoreenMichele
Yes, I know. That's why I added the qualifier I did: I'm aware that not
stating _I did this decades ago_ could be misconstrued as saying "You fools
just need to live at home and go to the local college. Problem solved!"

I'm not interested in being thusly misconstrued.

~~~
supernova87a
No I wasn't meaning to miscontrue you for others to read, and I did see your
caveat which is appreciated.

I just felt bad for the people who even back then were having trouble with
student debt. And to think they were in a relatively lucky age -- everyone is
in that boat now, with far less hope of getting out of the hole.

~~~
DoreenMichele
I think back then it was much more likely to be a case of "This person has
issues and they screwed up (or got screwed over by life/their parents)." These
days, it's much more a systemic issue.

The two individuals I knew had serious personal issues. I also had serious
personal issues. That's why I decided they were good examples of where my life
might end up if I bulled on ahead with going to college as if a degree would
fix everything.

In any era, some people will slip through the cracks. But a healthy system
makes that the exception, not the rule. Far too many people are overburdened
and falling down these days to the point where there is fairly widespread talk
of systemic failure.

------
hectorr1
Most successful people have X.

Government: “Let’s give everyone X!”

Over time the value of X is diluted, loses its status signaling, and overall
quality degrades.

Successful people move to Y.

~~~
mac01021
The big question is "what is Y in this case"?

~~~
zajio1am
To prove intelligence and conscientiousness? Probably PhD degree.

~~~
baron_harkonnen
A PhD only signals that you have an unhealthy relationship with academia.

I've interviewed and worked with so many PhD from top tier schools and it's
astounding to me that someone can spend 6+ years studying a quantitative
science, at a school like MIT or Harvard and still not have a basic
understanding of statistics, and worse be incapable of genuinely understanding
any of the quantitative tools they used for years.

The current generation of PhDs don't know how to do any kind of real research,
they simply know how to mechanically replicate the processes you need to
survive in academia today.

~~~
95_JL_OK
Another thing with a PhD is that it is no guarantee that you'll even be
hireable. I know of a number of PhD candidates who have trouble interacting in
a professional setting outside of the of 'I deserve deference because I have a
PhD, you don't necessarily even deserve respect' mentality.

I find sometimes a PhD can come with very ingrained attitude issues. I recall
working for a company with a new-recruit development program where really the
only way to fail out was through attitude issues. One of the people who
oversaw the program mentioned that she's only ever seen people with PhDs and
higher fail out over this issue.

~~~
analog31
I wonder if the same people would have failed out of any job requiring human
interaction. One thing graduate education does is attract people who know that
they would struggle in a mainstream work environment for whatever reason. Some
are outright crazy.

~~~
95_JL_OK
Quite possibly. I do know it's common to the point of being a trope that some
graduate students are just in graduate school to defer having to enter the
work-force. Some see it as a way to put off having to make major decisions or
processes like job hunting. Not like there's no real reason some opt to do
things like that. It is markedly easier to accept scholarships and do the grad
school circuit than find a job if you have mid to high grades.

------
082349872349872
A short (and hence inaccurate) overview of the apprenticeship system for the
trades in my country:

Apprentices start working one day a week and going to school four. They end up
working four days a week and going to school one. Apprentices can switch to a
more academic track, at a technical school or university, if they get the
desire.

When they finish with their apprenticeship, not only do they already have
horizontal ties with their classmates, but they also have vertical ties with
their business, its clients, and the master tradesmen who conducted the
classroom component and oversaw the theoretical and practical exams.

~~~
itsoktocry
> _Apprentices start working one day a week and going to school four. They end
> up working four days a week and going to school one._

It's brilliant. And is there _any_ profession that can't be done this way?

~~~
hocuspocus
Well you can't become a surgeon or a lawyer unless you switch a university
track at some point. But you can definitely work in the medical or legal field
by doing an apprenticeship first and moving on to a 2-3 year professional
degree (for instance nurse school isn't college here).

~~~
itsoktocry
> _Well you can 't become a surgeon or a lawyer unless you switch a university
> track at some point._

"Can't" because those are the rules we've established. But both of those
professions seem like they be perfect for apprenticeships (they were at one
point in history). It's not like studying the literature isn't or can't be a
part of apprenticeship curriculum.

~~~
hocuspocus
You could argue that med and law schools are pretty much trade schools, just
long ones :)

Unlike in the US where you first do 4 year of pre-med/pre-law, in continental
Europe med and law students start learning on the job early.

------
imgabe
Nothing is a guarantee of a good life.

It seems like people think you should be able to just check a few boxes, then
slot into a 9-5 and have everything taken care of for you for the rest of your
life.

Well, it doesn't work like that. Even after college you're still going to have
to plan and think and take action to make things happen for you. It's not just
all going to fall into your lap because you took a few classes in your early
20s.

~~~
francisofascii
To be fair, it used to work like that in America. Graduate high school, get a
decent paying union job in your hometown with an okay house to raise a family.
Drink beer and watch sports on the weekends with neighborhood buddies. Work
30-40 years and retire.

~~~
foobiekr
Even on the relatively short timeline of the history of the US, the period
you’re referring to was quite short.

~~~
francisofascii
With the huge increases in productivity since the 1950's, people should be
working less hours than in 1950. I don't have a good reason why this should be
an anomaly in history.

~~~
geodel
Sure, if one is willing to stay at 50's living standard. Trouble is what used
to be luxury then is now basic necessity and "everyone" must have it.

~~~
francisofascii
Exactly. We come back to our original problem. Our society turned "luxuries"
like college, into basic necessities that one must do or have. Two cars, big
homes, two parents able to work, phones, etc. are all great, but they cease to
be luxuries when they become required.

------
Upvoter33
Nothing is a guarantee of a good life.

A good life requires so many different elements, but mostly comes down to one
thing: what you put into it, esp. in regards to improving the lives and
welfare of others around you. Do this, and you will find that your own life
gets better and better. Be kind, do work to help others, care about people and
their lives (and not just your own) and you'll find that life will turn out
pretty darn fine.

~~~
rbanffy
A good ZIP code is a great start.

[https://talkpoverty.org/2015/12/17/american-dream-zip-
codes-...](https://talkpoverty.org/2015/12/17/american-dream-zip-codes-
affordable-housing/)

~~~
DiffEq
What made those zip codes good?

~~~
R0b0t1
Money.

~~~
rbanffy
Parent's money, to be precise.

------
throw7
If you want a _good_ life, DO something you are GOOD at.

That really is all there is to it. People recognize value and, guess what,
they'll gladly _pay_ you for your skill.

Happiness is up to you. The only thing I'd send your way to think about: "In
order to get love, you have to give love."

------
nu_throwaway
this sort of reads as self re-assurement for his son's path; the author is a
Harvard professor and I assume daily interaction in academia all revolves
around how great and virtuous higher ed is yet he's bucked the trend.

perhaps if he truly feels that way he could leave academia and cease
perpetuating the myth?

imo calling it an "investment" is part of the problem. its a pure sunk cost
and not an asset.

~~~
oneplane
People call it an investment because they think: I put something in it with
the goal of getting more out of it in total.

They don't see it as finance terminology and the concept of the word
investment in the context of others like 'sunk cost' and 'asset' holds very
little specific meaning in that case.

Ironically that is a 'problem' you can 'fix' by putting people in college and
teaching them basic accounting.

~~~
nu_throwaway
id argue that with an investment you can compare like to like alternatives and
can use a greater degree of objectivity.

there are far more variables to consider in higher ed (student loan debt,
opportunity cost of time, unemployment, alternative education experiences,
etc) so looking at it as an outflow of cash with a predictable return is
misleading at best.

no college has a monopoly on information and there is no proprietary info
gained (other than network from elite schools). in a sense the knowledge
component of a degree can only approach a value of zero as time goes on. the
experience aspect is of course subjective and very important to some.

~~~
oneplane
And that's why people use the word 'investment' without knowing the meaning of
the word.

------
Pete-Codes
If you are facing minimum of £27k tuition debt in England which AFAIK gathers
interest from day one I would probably skip it. And it's even worse in the US.

As far as webdev goes, you could do a bootcamp and be earning money within 6
months to a year. That's money that's hopefully going into your pension fund
and earning interest while your peers are still in class.

Or you could learn to code using cheap and/or free resources. College isn't
the only place to learn things nowadays and I think a lot of people haven't
caught up with that yet.

I used to think nothing could beat the college experience for bonding but I
think the formula of lots of people doing the same thing every day in a niche
environment they want to be in is easily repeatable. I'm still in contact with
digital nomads I hung out with in Bansko two years ago and I was only there
for a month. But it was an intense month of seeing each other every day, just
like college.

Oh and don't worry about not finding a dev job if you don't go to college.
Employers are coming around slowly and there are lots of success stories out
there: www.nocsdegree.com

~~~
harimau777
My concern would be whether people who take the bootcamp or self taught
approach would have the grounding in engineering and CS theory that someone
with a degree has.

I tend to feel that under-emphasizing these things are why the software
industry has so much of a problem with poor designs, low code quality, and
missed deadlines.

Maybe it would be possible to create a two year degree that would fill in
those gaps.

~~~
ckdarby
Here are my opinions being in the industry through various roles as a dev,
technical lead, and dev manager.

I think there is too much weight put on CS theory but it is valuable if you
already have it through a degree.

Outside of FAANG and similar unicorn growth kind of companies nearly nobody
else needs a new X or a different design of Y. I'd even go as far to say most
of the time we don't even need to understand the internal of the tool itself.

Gut feel says upwards of 99% of companies just need existing solutions
combined. I'd say 20% of the industry itself thinks they're actually apart of
the 1% that are truly facing a problem nobody else has.

I've seen companies suffer from too much CS theory. They get caught up in the
technical problems and the most ideal solutions instead of focusing on
providing customer value.

We hear this through the many talks about premature optimization and
reinventing the wheel but in the real world I hear a lot of individuals
calling the work a hack when it isn't the most optimized solution.

~~~
hpkuarg
Yeah, 99% of companies that need software developers can (and should) get away
with boring CRUD solutions using boring persistence like an RDBMS. You could
probably go a little fancier on your choice of language, using a nice
functional language like F# versus something like Java.

~~~
xwdv
99% of those companies building boring CRUD solutions don't even need
developers. They could just piece something together off the shelf and be done
with it. There's tons of products out there.

------
cafard
College was a lot less expensive when I went many years ago. However, I
suppose that if I had sunk what I and my family spent on it into local real
estate, I could have made more money over the years. I have regrets about
college--I wish I had taken more math, I wish I had studied more foreign
languages--but none of the regrets are financial.

------
kamaal
Life is a long haul ride, requires a lot of things to get through it well.
College education is obviously one part of it.

It would help people to realize any thing one does has an expiry date to it.
This is why you need to have a system to remain consistent at some broad
goals. Things like good eating, exercise, personal finance, relationships,
reading and learning have to be done consistently, and have to be done
throughout your life. You won't be good at life, if you don't do some of
things regardless of the age, and place you are in.

The loss is in assuming College Degree as an aristocratic right. If you think
this way you will soon realize there is nothing special about reading a few
books between ages 18 - 22 and doing no learning after that for decades.

To me primary purpose of education is initiation. College degree should be
treated as a good head start as an initiation. Nothing more, Nothing less.

~~~
nicoburns
> Life is a long haul ride, requires a lot of things to get through it well.
> College education is obviously one part of it.

I would disagree. College education is absolutely not required to get through
life. And it should be required even less than it is. There are some
professions for which degrees are super useful. But most people doing degrees
are going into professions that just require any degree and could easily be
done without one.

~~~
griffinkelly
I have a good friend of mine from high school who right after graduating
became a welder. He has a very high quality of live, better than many of my
friends who are doctors who are in debt and just now starting to pay off
loans.

------
bena
There are things that can increase the chances of "a good life". There is
nothing that can guarantee it. Pocket aces increase your chance of winning a
hand, but it doesn't guarantee you win.

So while a college degree is not a guarantee, the question is whether or not
it increases your chances. Because if it does, you can combine it with other
things that also increase your chances to give yourself the best shot.

I mean, it is possible to sit infinite monkeys at infinite typewriters and get
Shakespeare. Doesn't mean it's a good strategy.

Now, if college is unavailable to someone for whatever reason, it is good to
know that a good life isn't dependent on getting a college degree. You can
focus harder on other positive indicators.

But if we're going to dismiss everything that isn't a sure thing, we're going
to be just dismissing everything.

------
prewett
I'm not sure where this goes in the threads and discussion, but this historian
has a really nice article on the importance of the humanities. Unlike science
and technology, the humanities don't have an obvious ROI, especially when you
have to pay large sums of money, and I think he does a good job of
illustrating the value the humanities bring and possible consequences we are
seeing in our own society of not valuing them.

[https://acoup.blog/2020/07/03/collections-the-practical-
case...](https://acoup.blog/2020/07/03/collections-the-practical-case-on-why-
we-need-the-humanities/)

(And thank-you to whoever first posted a link to this guy's blog to HN, it's
really good, and I'm not even all that into history of warfare.)

------
shahbaby
In the CS field, the low hanging fruit is often worth more than the harder
stuff.

It's all about show and very little about substance.

Building a flashy web app and studying for interviews will get you further
than anything you learn in school.

------
DeonPenny
It shouldn't be. I never understood this idea. Because no one really says
this, and you especially don't have an excuse to believe this now.

Why would you subsidize a path in life making people in some cases worse.

------
onetimemanytime
In summary: many people go to expensive colleges and don't live a good life.
On other hand, many people don't go to colleges but live a good life.

That's all.

------
s1t5
I mean of course it isn't - no single aspect of your life will guarantee
happiness or a good life.

------
annoyingnoob
If you turn that statement around the same is true. You can have a 'Good Life'
without a college degree too. From my perspective, its more about what you can
produce on an on-going basis than any certificates that you hang on the wall.

------
pfarnsworth
Considering how expensive college is in the US, I'm actively considering
alternate options for my kids. It doesn't make sense to turn them into debt
slaves and get into hundreds of thousands in debt just to get a job.

------
melvinroest
I agree with this. In retrospect, a better path for me would've been (in The
Netherlands):

\- Don't do pre-university in high school but prepare for "higher job
education" in high school. Graduate at 17.

\- Do a "higher job education", speed it up (instead of 4 years do 3 years)
and graduate at 20. Do some web dev/UX-based degree (they exist and speedups
are possible, provided you're pro-active).

\- Get a job grind away for 3 to 5 years, learn about investing and invest
most of the money.

\- If you want to go deeper in computer science, because the craft is
beautiful then follow a master degree in security.

I'd have missed out on a lot of spiritual/some social development that I
wouldn't have gotten at "higher job education" but did get at uni (as I did
that for 6 months, a different degree though). However, compared to that, I
now have a career setback of 7 years.

~~~
markus92
Assuming you're Dutch, but in the context of this article, HBO is college as
well (the very clear distinction between applied universities and research
universities doesn't exist in the Americas).

~~~
melvinroest
Ah, I didn't know! Thanks. And community college is MBO then I guess?

~~~
markus92
Yeah, pretty much.

------
Lammy
College degrees only became a so-called "requirement" for a good life in
America around 1970 as a way to maintain racial segregation as a response to
all the civil rights legislation in the '60s :/

------
stosto88
It is close if you get a CS, Engineering or business degree.

------
ptero
The article seemed underwhelming to me. TLDR: college doesn't guarantee future
happiness (uhm, what does _guarantee_ it?) some kids would be happier just
going to work.

That's fair, but while some kids would thrive going to work after college many
more would be hampered by a lack of a college education for the rest of their
lives.

Probably US specific but, in most schools, education sucks and all good
colleges (not just super expensive; state schools, too) offer a solid STEM
background to fix the damage after lousy schools. College should not be
necessary, but in the US it kind of is.

So to make college optional, fix schools: reduce hours and drudgery, focus on
consistent STEM background, give extra support to kids that excel in a
subjext. My 2c.

------
unixhero
Knowing what you're worth.

Charging accordingly.

Don't work for middle men, get direct clients.

Make friends

Help people

Oh and study

~~~
minicoz
How to get direct clients?

Id love to go C2C but finding clients seems really hard.

------
taobility
There is no degree can guarantee a good life. But college degree can increase
dramatically for that possibility.

------
atlgator
This would have been a hot take if they published it 10 years ago. Now it's
old news.

------
zalkota
The only degrees worth going to school for are STEM.

------
makz
To be fair, nothing ever is a guarantee of anything.

------
tenderfault
and No college degree is a guarantee for a Bad life.

nothing hurts us more than the lack of (higher) education.

kids, stay in school.

~~~
cinntaile
There are plenty of people without a college degree that have a good life.
This disproves that it's a guarantee for a bad life.

------
peter303
I couldnt wait to escape the pre-internet dreariness of suburbia and attend
college (MIT).

------
darepublic
Thanks for telling me something I discovered half way through my university
studies.

------
naveen_
Yes.. But it's definitely far better than not having a college degree!!!

------
rayiner
It shouldn’t be!

------
ldad
...Breaking News

------
vladletter
Well, this article may target white people. You can do a bootc amp and be
paid. When you're part of a minority, you need a college degree to live.

~~~
culopatin
Can you expand on this? I'm a minority with no degree and I'm curious about
your perspective.

~~~
dgb23
I think it is conventional knowledge that if you are a minority you are often
forced to overcome discrimination and are being judged more harshly. I mostly
second-hand experienced this because half of my family are immigrants from a
country that had "low-status" when they got here.

Just to be sure: if you are young/new please don't take this as
discouragement. The less it applies to you the better. And if you face
discrimination then take pride in your accomplishments in spite of adversity.

But I find OP's assessment overly specific...

------
C1sc0cat
I had a mate who did this in the UK joined the army but he said he enjoyed his
time in the "Mob" but eventually you have to get a job that pays a real wage.

It is one way of getting training - and if you say went into the right MOS
cyber etc get to Master Sargent E8 you could then get a good job outside.

------
itsoktocry
Colleges have become massive businesses whose purpose is to jam kids through
to graduation (thus maximize tuition fees). Most kids don't really want to be
there. Both parties are incentivized to "get through it". When a large number
of young people have degrees obtained this way, is it any wonder the value is
diminished?

It's a shame, because I loved (and continue to love) higher education.

~~~
atomflunder
Is it really true that, in the US, many college students don't want to be
there but go nonetheless, despite having to pay absurd amounts of money? Where
I study, uni is basically free, and I've met very few people in my degree who
don't want to be there. This seems absurd to me.

~~~
itsoktocry
> _Is it really true that, in the US, many college students don 't want to be
> there but go nonetheless, despite having to pay absurd amounts of money?_

Judging by the number of people who don't show up to class or otherwise just
"get by", it's absolutely true. People "go to college" because they're told
it's their meal ticket into the middle class. This is the point of the
article.

Ask the average person if they'd rather pay to have the paper degree and not
have to attend any classes, or get the education for free but not receive any
paper credentials. You'll have your answer.

~~~
atomflunder
_> Ask the average person if they'd rather pay to have the paper degree and
not have to attend any classes, or get the education for free but not receive
any paper credentials. You'll have your answer._

This is an interesting thought, however I don't think it is a good test for
whether someone wants to be in college/uni or not. It is reasonable to enjoy
the education _and_ be realistic about the value of the paper certificate at
the same time.

The overall point about social pressures etc. is well taken though.

------
batt4good
Yeah, no sh*t.

Assuming you went to college for a marketable and "valuable" degree - by this,
I mean a degree with a clear path to a somewhat stable career. Usually, if you
don't have internships you've already shot yourself in the foot.

Plenty of people with family money and college still find ways to go bankrupt
from addiction, real-estate woes or bad investments.

Some just don't care enough or have enough drive to be "successful".

Some who find success get involved with the wrong people, or think their
source of money is an endless fountain and go broke or worse end up on the
street.

Goodness do journalists write for simpletons these days...

------
game_the0ry
No one really goes to college and grad school to learn. Higher ed is
commoditized as a:

* insurance policy, where students use it to avoid limiting themselves to low-status and low-paying careers

* lottery ticket, the gateway to a "prestige" career track [1]

* status signaling mechanism, where young people flex their educational elitism [2]

And higher ed is arguably bad at what its supposed be good at - a delivery
mechanism of relevant knowledge. If you have ever interviewed a fresh grad who
didn't study "Cracking the Coding Interview" or did not have a few "side
projects" under their belt, then you know what I am talking about.[3] The
internet is _the most_ effective information distribution delivery and it's
much cheaper, no wonder the value of college is in question.

[1] Consulting, finance, corporate middle management, grad school

[2] How many times have you been on a date and you tell or ask the other
person where they wen to college, what they majored in, etc

[3] Arguably, the standard that hiring managers set for new grads is too high.
Perhaps it's the employer that should be training fresh grads, but that is not
how the current job market works. I think about this a lot because it causes
problems for both young people and employers.

~~~
throwawaygh
_> If you have ever interviewed a fresh grad who didn't study "Cracking the
Coding Interview"_

Goodhart's Law.

 _> or did not have a few "side projects" under their belt_

IME: end-of-course projects at places like MIT and Carneige Mellon are often
much more impressive than the CRUD web app or copy-pasta Jupyter notebooks I
tend to see from e.g. coding bootcamps or especially self-taught applicants.
And students usually have a half dozen or more of those, in addition to
internship projects.

Sometimes a self-taught person comes along with a genuinely impressive
project, and I push hard to hire those folks. But for the most part it's silly
little single-person-project web apps and such.

 _> The internet is the most effective information distribution delivery and
it's much cheaper, no wonder the value of college is in question._

The questioning only really has a loud voice in places like the USA with
horrendously expensive higher ed systems. I don't really hear a lot of griping
about the cost of education or opining on internet alternatives when I'm in
Munich or Vienna.

~~~
hazz99
What sort of things do you see in these end-of-course projects? Genuinely
curious

~~~
muffinman26
At the University of Washington (which consistently ranks at the level of MIT
and Stanford for Computer Science), someone with a bachelor's in Computer
Science would generally be expected to complete at least two of: * Operating
Systems: Either implement lock/fork, assorted system calls, and virtual memory
for OS/161; or implement a device driver. * Networks: Implement the Tor
protocol or a project of similar complexity. * Compilers: Implement a compiler
for simplified Java including at least constant propagation or a similar
optimization. * Animation: A year-long course series that culminates with
animating a few-minute long movie. * A small video game. * A Maps-style
program for finding the shortest walk between any two locations on campus,
including displaying that information. This one was required for Computer
Science.

All but the last of these were done in groups of 2-3 people. It might have
been theoretically possible to graduate with only one big project, if you took
machine learning, security (the final project for this one was finding an
exploit in Firefox, but no actual code was required), and some heavy theory
classes. Most people would have done at least 3-4 big projects like this.

