I rarely say this and I like antipope but this analysis is ignorant. He’s right that university degrees have become a Ponzi scheme. Likely privatization of uni

I rarely say this and I like antipope but this analysis is ignorant. He’s right that university degrees have become a Ponzi scheme. Likely privatization of university had something to do with that, albeit indirectly. Anything financed by debt needs to have value that equals or exceeds the debt, for the life of the debt. The inflation in education prices has dramatically outpaced the value of the education, for many degrees, especially in the arts. He’s right that skills become obsolete much more quickly these days, but he’s wrong in assuming/implying that the degree still has value, esp value exceeding the debt, for any degree. No where is this more apparent as in arts degrees, particularly in the humanities. Graduates with these degrees end up with lower incomes (and lower rates of employment) than graduates with science degrees. It seems to me that with rising cost of degrees that many one involved with funding an education should look at future value of the degree as a significant decision criterion. Additionally, there is politics involved as many humanities departments have adopted increasingly left-of-center ideologies. So of course conservatives are going to criticize and target that. Note that I’m not interested in arguing the merits/correctness of such ideology, but I can understand why people who disagree with an ideology would be reticent to fund places that promote such ideology. So it’s not just “conservatives are bad and stupid” as TFA implies; and I don’t think that the article was either accurate or fair in its conclusions. [ed] s/find/fund/g