The author ignores one of the key requirements for a bubble, in the definition he provided: that the asset in question 'may be freely exchanged'. A year of coll

The author ignores one of the key requirements for a bubble, in the definition he provided: that the asset in question 'may be freely exchanged'. A year of college (or a diploma, for that matter) cannot be freely exhanged, and consequently there can be no bubble. There is no market for an education as an asset. There is a market for education as a service, and it can be argued that while demand is high for the service now (leading to higher prices), that demand will drop in the future. But there won't be any secondary effects like the housing bust, where people depended directly on the value of the asset. Not sure why people are promoting this fallacious 'education bubble' meme as some kind of scare tactic, but there must be an angle for them somehow, I see a lot of it.