Sure, but at least where I come from you have 0 debt if you spend 4 years studying philosophy or classical art(you also have 0 debt if you study Medicine for 10 years - it's all 100% free for students). There are people in US who are left in debt for decades after doing that.
It depends entirely on the situation - your degree will take time you could have spent doing other things (eg. apprenticeship) it will create expectations/influence the kind of job you're willing to accept and can be detrimental when applying for lower skilled jobs.
After talking to a people from local colleges my impression is that >50% (being very conservative) of the people who graduate from these places see their degree as a rite of passage in to a secure office job and have the impression that their degree will somehow magically guarantee (I guess based on previous generations)
They have no practical skills or affinity for the profession they are trying to enter (I've heard more than a few say they would prefer working in IT after getting a "CS degree" because "programming is hard and boring").
IMO the problem comes from "government programs to fill demand from IT sector" and the converting college to high school 2.0
When I went to college you actually had to pass entrance exams and people avoided technical colleges like plague if they actually weren't interested in them - this is still true for top colleges in EU - but the trend of pushing college as a ticket to a comfy office job obviously doesn't result in a bunch of highly skilled professionals (reduced standards to allow greater number of graduates) and gives you a bunch of people who have high expectations and no practical skills - so you get angry kids on the streets.
>When I went to college you actually had to pass entrance exams and people avoided technical colleges like plague if they actually weren't interested in them - this is still true for top colleges in EU - but the trend of pushing college as a ticket to a comfy office job obviously doesn't result in a bunch of highly skilled professionals (reduced standards to allow greater number of graduates) and gives you a bunch of people who have high expectations and no practical skills - so you get angry kids on the streets.
I see where you're coming from, but don't share the moral condemnation.
Why shouldn't they be angry?
Wanting to be merely decent/half-good at a job and make a living is fine by me -- and it's the way it has worked before (which is why the expected it to hold for them too).
If only the top deserved jobs, then either we'd need the whole population to have top skills (not really doable even if possible), or just give jobs to a 10% or so.
Besides, it's not most jobs are for anything really useful in the grand scheme of things. If you leave out some vital services, most of it is empty bureaucracy, redundant services, etc.
>Wanting to be merely decent/half-good at a job and make a living is fine by me -- and it's the way it has worked before (which is why the expected it to hold for them too).
Actually the point at which you can productive in the fields they are trying to enter (programming in this example) is so much higher than what colleges require to pass - this is the disconnect between modern "diploma mills" (government sponsored in this case - to prop education numbers and make voters happy) and historic college model. There is a shortage of programmers around here and around most EU - but of the kind that can actually be productive, not the kind that completed their 3 year degree (by attendance) and now want a well paying 9-5 job.
