[lagadu]

> I'm proud of it, but I'd never boast about how poorly it prepared me for the job market.

This is what I don't get: why is there an assumption that what you study at university has to be in any way related to the job market? You study something because you have an interest in developing it further, being able to get a job doing it is just a secondary perk.

[irishcoffee]

"See the sad thing about a guy like you, is in about 50 years you’re gonna start doin' some thinkin' on your own and you’re gonna come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life. One, don't do that. And two, you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a fuckin’ education you coulda' got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the Public Library."

[organsnyder]

If you approach college as a consumer of the information fed by professors and books, the Public Library approach is probably a great value proposition (though I'd question whether that $1.50 provided any value at all... :-) ).

However, a good education is much more than this. It includes the opportunity to engage in back-and-forth discussions with professors and classmates, building social and professional networks that can pay innumerable dividends, and to pursue experiences that aren't immediately related to career advancement.

College shouldn't merely be about vocational training. While that's one valuable outcome, there is much more that can be gained. Of course, many colleges (and individual students' experiences) fall far short of this—I wish I thought this way when I was in school, and didn't just see it as another hurdle to full adulthood—but that doesn't mean that the concept is flawed.

[Vraxx]

I agree with you in theory about the utility of higher education, but it falls apart when you start to consider (at least in the US) the practical system in which it exists. People are taking on debt in order to go to college and the fact of the matter is that it's a terrible financial decision if you aren't expecting some vocational training that will help pay that debt back faster than never taking it at all. I agree that life shouldn't be all about money, but most people can't afford to expend thousands of dollars and 4 years of time and work for an enriching experience.

The big distinction that ends up causing all these arguments is that when people say it's a bad decision, they mean it's a bad financial decision when you go to college and take on debt to get a degree that won't lead to a well paying job. Of course everything is about context, so it might not be a bad life choice, but the debt certainly should not be ignored in evaluating that decision.

[ktRolster]

Not to mention: while public libraries are great and I love them, thy are often lacking in-depth knowledge.

My local public library doesn't have a book on advanced logic design, for example. It favors a more 'general' collection, and thus books with heavy reliance on math tend to be omitted. Same with in-depth law books, they just aren't there.

[pmoriarty]

You could go to a university library. Often they're open to the general public for a modest fee.

[chestervonwinch]

> why is there an assumption that what you study at university has to be in any way related to the job market?

Because, like it or not, the majority of people's education is the means to obtain a job in a related field. People don't go tens of thousands of dollars into debt for some l'art pour l'art interest development; they do it because they expect the benefit from the degree (i.e., as a ticket into the job market in a field related to the degree) to outweigh the cost.

[RandomOpinion]

>Because, like it or not, the majority of people's education is the means to obtain a job in a related field.

The community college system is more than enough for those who view postsecondary education as a mere vocational program and doesn't require going "tens of thousands of dollars into debt".

[chestervonwinch]

Yes. There are financial incentives to go to community college, but if people made their decisions based solely on these, then no one would attend universities.

I'm not arguing for the status quo, but let's be honest about the current state of higher education in America: a ton of people have too much debt because of the pressure to attend a 4 year university. This pressure is usually of the form, "good education => good job". Moreover, "good" is often conflated with "expensive" or "prestigious" with regards to education, and conflated with "high-paying" with regards to a job.

[pmoriarty]

Also, this depends on which country you're talking about. University education in some countries is free. It's also possible to get scholarships which subsidize some or even all of your tuition. Finally, there's often financial aid of various types, from need-based to aid to certain minorities, etc.

[PirateDave]

It looks like in Los Angeles this could become a reality soon. At least for a year: http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-edu-garcetti-co...

[imtringued]

>This is what I don't get: why is there an assumption that what you study at university has to be in any way related to the job market?

I think the problem is on the employer/recruiter side. They use college/university degrees as a signaling mechanism to weed out candidates. To make sure that everyone can get the signalling degrees the government offers student loans. The tuition costs rise for everyone including those who don't want a signalling degree. They end up paying more without reaping the benefits of the signalling mechanism.

[themartorana]

Well, if you can afford that extra mortgage-sized payment while making minimum wage. We're not talking about studying online or at a community college or self-teaching, we're talking about a 4 year degree at a university.

[FussyZeus]

> why is there an assumption that what you study at university has to be in any way related to the job market?

Because you've borrowed an extraordinary amount of money, sometimes 2 or 3 years of what many Americans would consider a great salary, to attend said institution and the bank would like that money back at some point, they outline that fairly well in the documentation none of us read.

Honestly I think it's insane that one day, your given graduating high schooler has to raise his/her hand to go to the bathroom, and the next day they're entrusted to decide more or less how the next 70 years of their life will play out with incredibly little information at their disposal.

There's nothing wrong with philosophy or any of the classical educations, they are no doubt important. But priority #1 should be making sure your university's newest graduate doesn't starve to death in the street holding a $90,000 degree with "ANYTHING HELPS" written on the backside.