Because the job of a university isn't just to produce highly paid workers. It is to improve society through education. And sometimes people need to learn things that don't pay well, just for the sake of learning them.
People make fun of English and Art majors, but yet the majority of people consume art and writing as their primary activities outside of work (watching TV and movies).
The world would be a sad, boring place without those majors.
It would incentivize them to only offer majors that lead to high incomes. By pooling the money it removes that issue.
If everyone gets major that leads to high income, market will become oversaturated quickly
.5% of income over lifetime of alumni is very long-term investement
Universities are well aware of that and obviously won't self-sabotage in such dumb way
More likely outcome is that universities will ensure that most talented students will get high income majors
jobs that pay well are a signal that there is high demand for this skill in our society and that more people need to develops these skills.
Why would we not want universities to respond to that signal?
Because the job of a university isn't just to produce highly paid workers. It is to improve society through education. And sometimes people need to learn things that don't pay well, just for the sake of learning them.
People make fun of English and Art majors, but yet the majority of people consume art and writing as their primary activities outside of work (watching TV and movies).
The world would be a sad, boring place without those majors.
2 replies →
This is what Horkheimer and Adorno called "instrumental reason" ("instrumentelle Vernunft").
What makes a skill useful?