Economist Garrett Jones has observed that by the signalling-theory of education, the race for ever-more-degrees is an individually-attractive but net-socially-d

Economist Garrett Jones has observed that by the signalling-theory of education, the race for ever-more-degrees is an individually-attractive but net-socially-destructive activity, almost like pollution… and generally you don't want to subsidize pollution: http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2012/09/degree_pollutio.html http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2012/09/degree_pollutio.... As a few of the comments there note, this could actually form an argument for taxing rather than subsidizing schooling. I believe the reasoning can be refined (as my bottom-most comment there notes): actual education still has positive social externalities. It's the granting of prestigious, rationed credentials that leads to the negative-sum competition, institutional rents, and growing costs. So maybe, we could subsidize education… but tax credentials. The unbundling of education and assessment, as is happening with online offerings and could be further encouraged by policy, could make this easier.