
Some say bypassing a higher education is smarter than paying for a degree - cwan
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/09/AR2010090903350.html?hpid=topnews
======
Mc_Big_G
Personal anecdote:

Supported a large family through work and student loans. The only job I could
get was a gas station attendant and/or roofer and did both all during college.
These jobs were a kind of torture for someone who took AP calculus senior year
of high school.

Fast forward five years, two-internships and one mechanical engineering
degree. I was now qualified for a $41k+ (13 years ago) job and started the day
after graduation. Goodbye gas pumps and hot tar.

Unfortunately, most employers are too busy to bother finding out if someone is
smart enough to be a great employee, so they rely on that piece of paper as
your validation. However, engineering school instills a deep understanding of
logic, critical thinking, organizational skills and knowledge that is very
difficult to pick up by yourself.

I'll be paying $500+/month on my student loans for a looooong time, but it's
THE BEST MONEY I EVER SPENT.

~~~
maukdaddy
I wish I could upvote you more. The fact that kids can work in college seems
to be beyond most people.

My wife worked part-time all through college and managed to get an engineering
degree. I worked 25+ hours per week through most of my college and managed to
get a CS/MIS degree. Sure we each had approx. 20k in student loans, but that
is entirely manageable.

One thing about college - you get exposed to areas you never would on your
own. As part of my education I was forced to take language and public speaking
classes. These are areas I would not have explored on my own. But to be
honest, they have been worth far more than any technology class I took.

I'd like to echo: THE BEST MONEY I EVER SPENT.

edit: Our degrees are in marketable fields. Spending a fortune for a degree in
art history is not marketable, and is entirely foolish.

~~~
patio11
A degree in art history is like DHH's car: not quite my taste in conspicuous
consumption, but I support rich peoples' right to waste their own money.

~~~
maukdaddy
Oh I support their right to waste their money.

But next time I read the 5000th article on the NYT about poor Johnny that
can't find a job because he only has a degree in art history, yet has $200k in
student loans, I'm going to lose it.

~~~
_delirium
Does that actually happen much (the lack of jobs, not the NYT articles)?
Unemployment is low among people with college degrees of any kind--- the big
rises in unemployment we've seen lately are mainly among non-degree-holding
former blue-collar workers who've been unable to find new work as factories
have closed. The people I know with art and art-history degrees seem to have
no problem finding work with design and advertising firms, among other things.

Now, they aren't all doing their first choice or what their degree exactly is
about, but that's also true of many technical people. Probably the _worst_
group for that is people with only a B.S. in a basic science--- nobody I know
with just a B.S. in physics, bio, or chemistry has been able to get a job
they're particularly happy with in science. Some have gone back to grad
school, and others have treated it as just an "I'm smart" piece of paper to
get them in the door to other, not-very-related careers. So I don't actually
see a huge difference between an art-history and a biology degree from the
practicality perspective (the average starting salaries are comparable, too).

~~~
steveklabnik
I have three friends who are still looking for jobs after college, including
one who's had to do manual labor for the last two years. :/

------
parfe
All this hate on a college education annoys me to no end. I went to college to
learn. I worked hard at getting myself a diverse education.

I took classes in CS, Geology, Philosophy, History, Political Science,
Sociology, Psychology, Math, Physics and some stuff I'm forgetting. Other than
the CS, I directly use exactly _zero_ of it in my career. And I use more of
what I learned in my part time jobs during school than actual CS classes

Ancient Greece, Modern China or glacial striations have no bearing on my
career. But maybe one day I'll travel to China or Greece, or be able to
explain to a date on a hike why the exposed rock face in the valley is heavily
marked while the summit is not. And I know that to raise my now 13 month old
dog positive reinforcement is absolutely essential and punishment is pointless
if I'm even 30 seconds late to apply it.

If you want job training go to Lincoln Tech and learn how to repair
refrigeration units or fix a car.

~~~
dgabriel
This is all good, but if you have to go $220k in debt to learn about stuff,
that's ridiculous.

There are ways to learn and grow outside of academia, and until the costs
become reasonable again, I don't pooh-pooh anyone who decides to learn about
Modern China by traveling to China for a year instead of taking the class.

~~~
cageface
If you're bright and motivated, you can learn a lot more on your own. Why
should you be forced to march through every subject lock-step with 30-100
other students at a median pace that's probably unsuitable for 2/3 of the
class in any given week? Why should your learning be doled out in time chunks
that are arbitrarily convenient for administrative purposes and nothing more?
Why limit your study to the handful of sanctified texts when you have the
entire internet at your fingers? Why pay that hefty tuition to sit in a
lecture hall so crowded you may never ask the teacher a single question only
to move to a T.A. section run by a harried grad student that often barely
speaks English? The traditional academic learning model is an artifact of
500-year old technology.

Not only that, but the academic humanities are totally infested with
continental post-structuralism. If anything you're just setting yourself up to
be the victim of the next Sokal's Hoax.

~~~
harshpotatoes
If you're bright and motivated, and can learn a lot on your own, you can learn
even more when you are with people who already are knowledgeable. I don't know
why people don't do this. If you go to class, read more than what the teacher
assigns, and think of interesting questions, the teacher will talk to you and
give you insight, even if that teacher is teaching a 300 person lecture.

I don't see how you can advocate self directed learning, and yet in the same
breath suggest that a person with such self motivation and discipline would
somehow drudge along with the rest of the class.

~~~
cageface
You don't have any choice but to drudge along. The pace of the lectures is set
before the class starts. If you're the kind of student that can race ahead on
his own speed through the text then why do you need the lectures?

I was in a lot of 100-300 person classes and there were always at least 10-20
people chasing after the lecturer at the end of every class. You were damn
lucky if you got more than 2 questions in the whole semester. Upper level
classes were better, of course.

~~~
argv_empty
The professors I had were always excited to help students who wanted to run
ahead of or branch out from the lecture schedule. Catch them in their office
when it's not just before or just after class.

~~~
cageface
I think the real problem, at least here in the U.S., is that most people learn
next to nothing in high school so they have to spend 1-2 years in college in
huge auditorium classes catching up.

If you want to fix college you first have to fix high school.

------
DanielBMarkham
I'm not going to pile on college, or defend it for that matter, but I will
make a couple observations.

First, if you just spent many years of your life and tens of thousands of
dollars on something, it's going to be a great thing. This is "mountain
climber" syndrome, which says that after you spend all that time and pain
climbing the mountain, it's going to be the best experience ever.

Second, if the cost of college is rising faster than the cost of inflation,
the question isn't _is college worth it_ , the question is _is college worth
it so far_. Because at some point it's not going to be worth it. The only
question is when.

I'm a huge fan of education. Personally I wish that everybody had the
equivalent of a 4-year degree in liberal arts before even starting on the rest
of their education careers. But I think it's painfully obvious that the idea
of college as being a simple ticket out of anywhere has gotten a lot more
complex than it used to be. Lots of factors to weigh. Hard-working people who
self-educate do well with or without college. Other folks may be thinking that
college is giving them something that it isn't.

Not only is the cost an issue, but technology is moving so quickly that having
a little stamp of approval isn't going to hold weight like it did even back
forty years ago. If you're in the technology field and your degree is more
than ten years old? You've got an ancient history degree, sadly.

~~~
olegkikin
I'm a huge fan of education, but spending 4 years on a liberal art degree is a
huge waste of time. It will not land you a job.

If you actually want to learn something, go online. Most of the information is
out there.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
everybody had the _equivalent_ of a 4-year degree in liberal arts

nobody is saying spend 4 years in liberal arts. The point is that a 4-year
degree that would give you a wide cultural background (and no, I'm not talking
talking-to-trees, I mean things like classics, history, art, etc) and allow
you to enjoy life more. Doesn't have to take any extra time. You can do it
anytime you like. I just think that there is a great benefit to the things
offered under the title "liberal arts" -- much more than we analytical people
like to admit.

Yes, short-term, get something that works for you. These short-term, long-term
value decisions is exactly why it's such a difficult conversation to have.

Sadly, we've created a system of higher education that I think has developed a
system of courseware with a very high impedance mismatch with the criteria use
to decide. That just makes figuring out the usefulness of college tougher on
everybody.

------
RiderOfGiraffes
Print version, no ads, single page, faster loading:

[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2010/09...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2010/09/09/AR2010090903350_pf.html)

~~~
cryptoz
First, your linked page _does_ have ads. You must have adblock on if you
didn't see it. Second, traditional newspapers are struggling and it seems
pretty mean to go out of your way to block their ads. The industry needs a new
plan and a total overhaul but in the meantime, lets at least not direct people
away from their only revenue source online.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
Huh, interesting. I was wondering why all the hate/down-votes.

OK, I won't edit the original because that's what I wrote, and that's what's
being down-voted - fair enough. Even so, it's still single page and _much_
faster loading. I don't even really mind the ads, I just get annoyed at having
to click through, click through, click through, ...

Thanks for leaving the comment and helping me (and possibly others) learn, and
not just down-voting and moving on.

------
jmspring
It really does depend on your situation. At a prior employer, about three
years ago, we brought on an intern as a developer who wanted to skip college.
He felt he wouldn't learn anything in school and that he should go straight
into working.

He was smart, but after awhile it was decided to let him go for a couple of
reasons - mainly around professional behavior and maturity. He couldn't focus
and management didn't plan for/have the bandwidth to really properly handle an
intern in this situation. Some of us tried to help where we could, but already
having to work 60+ hour weeks left little energy/time to do so.

In the years since he was let go, he has matured and is turning out some great
projects and working at a company that is really happy to have him. It took
time and a good amount of job hopping for him to get his sea legs.

College is just as much about learning as it is about maturing and getting out
on your own. Depending on the person, some people need this and some may not.

~~~
bmelton
In general though, I'd say a lot of natural maturation occurs between the ages
of 18 and 22, or even older for your masters degrees and the like.

Anecdotally, I once worked with a girl who on paper was sharp as a whip -- 2
masters degrees from prestigious colleges, top of her class, etc., but in
person, was quite socially awkward and had absolutely zero real world
experience, as she had only ever been a professional student. She was
responsible and mature enough to do the job, and she definitely had plenty of
book-type scenarios upon which to apply her vast education, but in the little
things, that typically aren't taught out of books, she floundered. Now I think
she holds a great title in finance at a decent bank, which probably suits her
education better, and hopefully affords her less social interaction than when
I knew her.

Another thing that bothers me about college (I didn't attend, though I
constantly consider enrolling now) -- is that it means that degree seekers end
up in the job market so late in life. I had a portfolio of applications I'd
written, technical expertise, and a good working reputation by the time most
college grads are just entering the job market.

Obviously, I'm potentially discriminated against by companies who heavily
value college degrees, but at least for early job markets, it seems that
(outside of silicon valley anyway) the college grads who had to compete with
others like myself were at a disadvantage.

------
Retric
There are two basic fallacy’s in this article. One, all colleges cost 200k,
and second the assumption that most degrees are equivalent. In many ways a
college education is much like a car because a Honda civic will get you around
the country but a Bugatti Vayron can get you there much faster. So it comes
down to how much a more prestigious education is worth? If you are going down
the street or becoming a social worker then Harvard is probably a waste of
time.

PS: I have a BS from small and inexpensive college and at 28 I got promoted to
the same job as the 27 year old with a BS and MS from MIT I sit next to. Now
we both went to college, but if you compare the sticker price of his education
he got a much worse deal then I did. Granted, 10 years from now he will
probably make more than I will because he works ridiculously harder than I do.

~~~
yardie
I went to a huge land-grant university in the south and my ex-girlfriend went
to a private college in the mid-atlantic. She left school with $8000 of loans
and mine was double that.

How is that possible? The state backloaded the additional costs into
university "fees". And my scholarships, though easier to get, were much
smaller (public schools are misers about the grant money). Her school had 3
itemized things: tuition, housing, meal plan. Tuition was $40,000 and the
school paid for 90% of it, Pell, Stafford, and workstudy covered the rest.
Since the majority of her fellow students came from rich, mid-atlantic
families they were generous with the endowments.

The point is if you ask your colleague from MIT how much he paid he might have
even paid less than you. Those that can get into those schools have no problem
affording them. I believe for Harvard any family making <$70,000 are fully
covered. It's probably a similar scheme for MIT.

~~~
joshuacc
This is a really important point. My wife attended one of the Seven Sisters.
While we're still paying college loans, we owe much less than if she'd gone to
any of the state schools in her area.

------
ziweb
Unless you want a job in Academia. College is still a big barrier for many
professions, and probably the only way you will have adequate training for
those professions.

Also, I would not give a 18 year old $10,000 to start a business. You need at
least some training or experience working before you head out on your own. If
I had $10,000 I would give it to him only if I saw he had a real plan.

~~~
josefresco
Are you implying that you'd give $10,000 to an 18 year old to spend on/at
college with no plan and/or major? Seems just as crazy.

~~~
ziweb
Yes, I think there are certain areas in technology were someone 18 - 20 can
come up with a spectacular idea. Just didn't want to rule that out.

------
parbo
Or live in a country where higher education is free _.

_ Paid for by taxes (I just know someone will point this out)

------
tofumatt
I actually dropped out of university because of work. I started making
$35k/year plus freelancing (usually another $10-20k) when I was 18, and while
I tried to keep going to school for awhile during work, it was too hectic and
I wasn't interested in class anyway/anymore. I was already working in my field
of study and felt I learned more on my own.

Sometimes I'm bummed out I never took some lower-level, nitty-gritty CS
classes, but I don't miss university in general, and I've learned a lot of the
theory/low-level stuff you don't just "pick up" through teaching myself and
learning from other programmers at work.

Four years later it seems like the right choice, as I'm making a lot more than
I did at 18 as a full-time, salaried employee at a small startup-ish company.

~~~
carlrice
Similar deal here. Went for two years, got a full time job and I couldn't get
student loans big enough to cover the other two. Were the classes and
connections worth the price even without a degree? Absolutely. Considering
todays economy, a body of work, salary and two additional years of work
experience is more valuable than a BFA from a pricy art school.

------
ziweb
It might be better to question why college is so expensive, or why student
loans are so harsh ( <http://www.collegescholarships.org/research/student-
loans/> ) For example, in Denmark tuition is free for undergraduate and MSc
and MA studies. (
<http://www.internationalgraduate.net/denmark_university.htm> )

------
InclinedPlane
I enjoyed my time in college, I even learned and experienced much that I still
value. However, to be honest, most of the _knowledge_ that I value has come
outside of traditional education. Much of my most useful knowledge in physics,
biology, astronomy, language, etc. has come from self-study, from reading old
issues of National Geographic, Popular Science, Scientific American during
high school and after, from reading text books and non-fiction books on my
own. The most important contribution to my intellectual character has probably
come from Carl Sagan's Cosmos, above any course or line of study in formal
education.

That being said, there have been some substantial and crucial bits of
knowledge I likely would not have acquired outside of school. Calculus and
advanced mathematics, most especially the rigor of formal proofs that has
proven immensely useful and practical to me and yet came of a degree course I
chose essential by accident. And the experience of chemistry laboratory
courses, using equipment that I would not have had access to outside of
college, is something I would be sorry to have missed.

Overall, I'd say that college can still be a valuable experience but the
increasing reliance on college as the sole route to education is troublesome
and problematic.

------
ryanlchan
I'm sick and tired of people putting arbitrary dollar valuations on abstract
things. College is not a financial investment. You can not only look at your
debt and your income to make this decision. It might make for a good,
sensational news article, but it's almost immoral how backwards this viewpoint
is.

The real value in college, like just about any other pursuit, is network
building. Like several commenters have said, if all you wanted out of school
was to learn something, you could go to the library. The fees for college are
for the intangible aspects, and are worth far more than a direct dollars-to-
dollars comparison will show.

Think of college as an IDE for personal development. It sets up a ready-made
environment for you to explore new relationships, indulge in a variety of
pursuits, and learn about the world. There are thousands of other people using
the same IDE, creating a lively place for discussion of issues you'd never
otherwise think of. People introduce you to new features or mechanics which
you never considered before; you naturally begin to collaborate and contribute
to large scale projects. You might even lead a few. Could you get all of these
experience by piecing different activities together? Of course. Would it be
nearly as productive, successful, and transformational? Of course not.

Like an IDE though, sometimes college can get a little bulky; you're naturally
going to be paying for some features you don't want or use. But most of us
keep paying anyway, because there's a few killer features which make it all
worthwhile, ones that you wouldn't dare put a pricetag on. Attending
university altered the entire trajectory of my life, starting from how I saw
myself to what I want to accomplish. It redefined what I thought was possible
for human endurance and achievement. It restored my faith in the ability of
small groups to enact large positive change. It cost a pretty penny, but it
has provided an unquantifiably large return on investment.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
>The real value in college, like just about any other pursuit, is network
building.

I was with you for the first para. I thought you were going to say the
building of a base on which to expand the realm of human understanding,
further the development of the human race, expand minds and horizons ...

------
sbowles
I think this is a dangerous assertion, and I say this as someone who didn’t
finish college and did pretty well financially in the end (alas no successful
exits, only market-rate Bay Area startup wages). Only the super motivated,
talented, brass-balled or well connected can manage the upstream push against
the pervasive social perception - outside of tech centers - you’re second rate
if you didn’t finish college.

I think the American education system is broken for a sizeable percentage of
kids, from low-quality grade schools all the way through to the outrageous
cost of college. For most poor or middle class kids who aren’t in tech,
currently they need the exposure to college and they need some additional
skills training if they’re to have any hope of getting a decent job after high
school. Unfortunately, the esoteric, academic, over-priced world of
universities have been turned into the required stepping stone for employment
when it is only minimally relevant in many employment sectors. It would be
more productive to reinvigorate market-based apprentice programs, revamp
junior colleges and redirect some state/federal post secondary education
funding to the employee job training credit to truly incentivize employers to
take on more entry level employees. Less kids with less debt is a good thing,
but they still need skills to be employable. I think it is easy for those of
us who are self-directed learners to forget about our peers who really do need
training and coaching to succeed.

Like many on this board, learning to code was my meal ticket for years and it
is the work world safe haven for those who drop out of/never go to college. I
got grilled a lot more about why I didn’t finish college once I moved into
code-free jobs. There are millions of university graduates who are unemployed
right now. It takes a certain degree of arrogance to pitch your degree-free
self as a better candidate than your degreed competitors. I’d never be so smug
and delusional about the specificity of my degree-free success to pitch
foregoing college in the present economic environment to someone just out of
high school. Even when it worked for me.

------
orenmazor
you dont go to college to get a job. you go there to get an education.

~~~
pmichaud
That's what they say when you point out that college doesn't really -> job
anymore.

I went to college, and pretty much got jack shit for an education. I educated
myself. I went to a small high, Catholic high school and learned more there in
the sense of "enrichment" than I ever did at the colleges I attended (and
excelled in). Maybe at some point this was true: colleges enrich you, and
college means you can get better jobs. That's not really true for a lot of
people now, myself among them.

~~~
achompas
Agreed. I've learned more about life and the world in the years after college
than in the 4 years I spent getting my BA.

------
ajleary
This is really a story of the rising cost of college. As it has grown well
beyond the cost of inflation it leave many with debt our parent's generation
never had. My father busted his tail in the summers and paid for half a year
of college with what he saved.

Does anyone think the quality of educations has gotten better? Is it
administration? Facilities? Research?

Reduce the waste in education and the value goes up for everyone (except maybe
some people in the dean's office).

------
ams6110
OK so the guy gets a degree in computer science, then trys his hand at
investing and stock picking, fails, and concludes that college is a scam?

~~~
rgoddard
I would see it as a case of premature optimization.

------
Hovertruck
I didn't get a college degree and I feel like I'm doing relatively well.
Sometimes I wonder if I'll regret not going, but it is what it is.

------
beilabs
This was my Irish education:

1 degree, 1 postgrad + 1 MSc later. 7 years of university.

Total university fees: Roughly 5000 euros.

What would be the equivalent in the United States?

~~~
patio11
Zero to about $400k. Depends on university, grant aid, academic performance,
and family ability to pay.

Edit to add: technically, cost could be negative. Mine was for a few semesters
due to aggressive pursuit of scholarships. I know at least three people paid
to study.

------
rwaliany
It varies per person. For me, I finished all of my curriculum at Carnegie
Mellon, but I will not be completing my degree because I've already gained all
the value in my opinion. I think going to school and dropping out was very
valuable to me.

------
maigret
I'm repeating myself as I wrote that already, but this is not the case in most
European countries. The education is not so bad out here after all, and you
can drink alcohol before 21.

------
rythie
It seems odd that in U.S. you have to make such a choice, in the U.K.,
University is in easy reach of most (provided they did well enough at school).

------
noodle
its all situational, at least right now.

in some cases, it probably is smarter for an individual to bypass higher
education. or, instead of going to a 4-year college, it would be smarter to go
to a 2-year tech school or trade school. in others, its smarter for someone to
go to the prestigious, expensive university.

------
9ec4c12949a4f3
Higher education for the majority is a total scam, I'm sorry this just needs
to be said.

I apologize for not getting into details, I am in the progress of a real post
you may expect posted sometime after my work-day is done and I get home
(expect it within 12 hours).

Here's the first few lines anyway:

We are indoctrinated into the belief from the earliest stages of our lives
that we must head to the best schools and become specialists in an
indescribably small target of knowledge if we are to ever "make something" of
ourselves. In our capitalist society this means rich.

(Surprisingly, it's not a rant against capitalism, just the establishment,
man.)

------
9ec4c12949a4f3
Higher education has become perhaps one of the largest and most well composed
scams of our age, at least, in North America (I have no global perspectives
into this). We are indoctrinated into the belief from the earliest stages of
our lives that we must head to the best schools and become specialists in an
indescribably small target of knowledge if we are to ever "make something" of
ourselves: in our capitalist society, this means rich.

So our society tell us that to live the life we're supposed to live (ie, "Six
figures, at the least!" means you're happy), we need to gain the means to make
that kind of money. We have arrived at this universal consensus that higher
education will produce your goals and therefore university education equates
to life fulfillment. How did we get here? By having people from highly
specialized and technical fields being able to charge higher-than-average
value for their time. That's right, university enabled many really smart
people to get really high-paying jobs. These people all went to university to
make something of themselves. We also don't like to take risks to get where we
want to be, as we have it drilled into our heads since youth that risks are
bad and university is the only way to ensure you'll be happy later in life,
because lots of high-paying jobs come demand university education of _any_
type, and it's the best way to ensure you get a job (lowering your risk of not
making six-figures). These two factors have lead to our inability to evaluate
this realm without the consensus that university is the key to life
fulfillment (a fat juicy salary). Despite my tone, there isn't anything
socially wrong with this model.

So where's the scam? We're told that university is the key to the universe.
Universities have long since abandoned our goals in attending them, and
realized they are a business. They can create classes that aren't exactly
surgery, building rockets, advanced maths-- (things that are the high-paying
jobs, and be deserving of it), and still make money off of them. Why? You
attribute value to a scrap of paper that has the words "Bachelor's degree" or
"Masters degree" of _ANY_ type, entirely without the slightest consideration
for what was studied, what was retained, how one can preform, or anything from
those 5 years. It's almost as if this is straight out of Hairy Potter: you're
writing down on a magic scroll "Curriculum vitae" add the archaic words
"Baccalaureus in Arte Ingeniaria" and poof you've been instantly transported
to the land of SixFig to do the same repetitive task for the next 50 years of
your life, which will make you very, very happy.

We have such a bias to generalize that any person with any degree is better
than any person with no degree simply from the value we attribute to this
magic word. What does a degree even mean now? The business of education has
flooded the market with degrees to get more business. We have students
applying in droves with the knowledge that they simply must get a degree to
live a proper life, but they don't want to do surgery or rocket science (it's
too hard, or uninteresting), so they study really interesting things like the
arts, history, and philosophy (things that our society and more importantly
business out to make money hardly care about; their only "9-5 SixFig low-risk"
jobs are to teach what they learn, and thus go learn a skill applicable to
that business).

The scam doesn't just end there. Human Resources departments across the
country have so highly placed value into simply having this document that they
mandate it's requirement on almost every job application they put out,
especially the really repetitive and easy work in an attempt to "weed out all
the bad candidates". They honestly don't even care what you studied, they just
want to see it, it's great to have it on there. I have heard enough asinine
flawed reasons defending why it's there to fill a room, but when it comes down
to it, it's simply there because people looking to hire you have placed a lot
of value into any random specialization of knowledge from any random
institution. They don't even care how well you did, or what your W degree in
field X at school Y from year Z taught you that is different from a W degree
in field X at school A from year Q. Oh, but Brock University, Ontario is
better than SD University, Rajasthan ... that's obviously a given because
they're from a country I know nothing about.

A degree is treated as if it's part of an ISO standard of documents, but
entirely ad-hock, vaguely defined, difficult to match knowledge gained with
job requirements (pfft, a software degree, did you even learn what GIT was or
how to talk to business people, or did you just write a linked list in 50
languages?)

Suddenly we are full of anecdotal evidence that degrees are useless: we have
cabbies, stock boys, cashiers, janitors, librarians, wait staff, and gas
attendants with magic letters at the end of their names. Damn, someone lied to
us, the magic spell didn't work, and yet somehow, we're full of anecdotal
evidence of people who don't get these magic letters starting massive and
successful businesses all over the world, producing paradigm shifts in their
field of interest. And still we have statistical proof that people with
degrees make more money: HR says that it's required to make that much.

A degree is a wonderful thing when you want to try and move up in a kafkaesque
bureaucracy where you're surrounded by others doing the same thing for 50
years all very, very happy that they used to know so much about some special
field of interest now long and far in the past, so remote from this
spreadsheet they look at every day with a fist full of highlighters trying to
reach Dave's quota of spreadsheets they glared down for the month.

A degree will get you a job running behind a wall every day to push the X-Ray
button so you can look for a pre-defined and well established set of what
different types of damage look like. You obviously had to study the history of
the machines to come to those conclusions, and know that electrons are being
thrown from a spinning tungsten disk to a volt-sensitive sheet, and they need
to know how electrons displace the ones in your bones, and how the chemicals
work, because they'll be busy expanding that science while they look at your
broken bone's image and match it against the examples. Makes sense, right? You
need a degree to do a task that really is simple? I mean, that's what other
people with degrees say, and they're all smart too... better shut up so I
don't sound like an idiot in front of the geniuses who are so much happier
than me because they make so much more money. I just don't "get" it, I never
learned the special "ways to think" in university.

A degree could also lead to something really rewarding, you might study
something you love, and gain a knowledge of the universe you could get about
philosophers and art (but, that's not available at the library, and if it
were, probably doesn't come with bragging rights). You might expand your field
of study, you might become famous, you might even have studied something that
is a very high-paying skill to have and be very happy on your death bed that
you made that much money.

So, go on, buy a few sports cars or even a house worth of education in
degrees, you're going to be working hard on expanding that field sitting
behind a 9-5 job for the next 50 years wrapped in a warm lie that it was
necessary to do your job that could get outmoded very quickly if we dropped
the act. Just be sure you don't disappoint your parents that worked their
asses off to pay for you to have the chances they [never] had, do what they
did[n't do]: get a degree. Just don't lose sight of what's important.

tl;dr: Dogma.

------
drivebyacct2
What about not paying for college? I'm loving the college life and not paying
a dime for it.

~~~
gacba
Nice gig if you can get it. Not everyone is so lucky, unfortunately.

~~~
drivebyacct2
Right. I'm just used to seeing the stance "College is a waste of
(time/money/etc)". I mean, if you're paying for college, it's a tradeoff just
like anything is.

It's an investment. If it's not going to pay off in the long run, don't go.
Basic economics. That was my point, didn't intend to sound so arrogant in my
op. :(

~~~
drivebyacct2
Though now that I look back, I generally don't appreciate being told that my
scholarships were attributed to luck. Especially considering how hard I worked
for them in HS and how hard I continue to work to keep them.

------
AlexC04
I'll have to admit, this was really a bit of a TLDR for me. I've heard the
arguments before (and by scanning this one it seems generally an economic
argument).

I feel that it's a fair point if your sole measure of lifetime value is an
economic one... unfortunately I disagree that money and Debt are the only
things to measure your life by.

I found University opened my mind in ways that I don't think I could have
found on my own.

It was very little things for me in terms of a way of thinking, but
"correlation does not equal causation" fell upon me like a 10 megaton bomb.

That's the most significant one that I can recall but there were thousands of
little things that I'd never really have tracked down on my own.

Plus the fun and friends and University girls :)

Debt is one way to measure your decision to attend University, richness of
life experience is another.

Undoubtedly there are other cheaper ways to experience life... but I think
University is a damned good one.

EDIT: Arguably, there's probably quite a bit of post-hoc decision making going
on in that argument as well. "I came out of uni with debt and without a job -
so I would have been better off without it" does not mean "people in general
are better off without university"

And so on.

