This tenured professor thinks so.
What say you?
The video makes some good arguments, and then hashes them with bad arguments and misses the point in a lot of cases.
The first thing to say is that college in the US is different to university in other countries. The US could do things different.
The second is that an educated workforce attracts educated work. How many high tech companies are there in Somalia?
Thirdly education is difficult to quantify. People want to be able to understand education in a series of numbers.
When I studied, I grew as a person. In fact I often learned just by being forced to learn. But I learned how to think better. How do you quantify that? You can't.
The US has a system of tenure professors, which is wrong. Professors shouldn't just be teaching. They should be learning, they should be writing, they should be purveyors of learning. They make a country more educated, they spread ideas, they push boundaries etc.
Which subjects aren't worthy?
Engineering is great. You come out of it with a job. Great.
Social Science. Maybe less so, it's not directed at one job. However understanding people is a massive industry. Advertising demands that people understand how people think. People therefore learn such things.
Literature. Well, the literary world makes a lot of money. Understanding how good books are written can help people in many jobs, both in the literary world and also in the business world.
To dismiss things because you can't quantify something is ludicrous.
However, US colleges are too expensive, which is probably their best argument. Why go waste all this money at colleges with nice sports facilities, with grants for football players, with all that shit?
Go to Europe and find a university that gives grants to sports stars. They exist. Not many, but they exist. Sports facilities are usually a piece of grass with lines on them. That's all they need. They don't need a 60,000 seater stadium that the students have to pay for in order to get an education.