College education is treated as a litmus test for whether someone can figure out abstract things and produce useful output. Which is all fine and dandy, except that ”having a degree” is not really a pure measurement: it’s always confounded with a certain amount of wading-through-the-bullwhip tenacity (useless but mandatory curriculum -> non-questioning serf mentality) and a hefty slice of affluenza (outright bribery).

It sounds like you are arguing that college degrees are poor signals for one’s intelligence but then you write:

> a certain amount of wading-through-the-bullwhip tenacity (useless but mandatory curriculum -> non-questioning serf mentality)

And I think a lot of people (though not me and maybe not you) would find that that is a good description of attributes employers would like. And for many people the point of a college degree is appealing to employers rather than proving oneself to be intelligent.

I agree, but stated another way, college is also a test of 'can this person adapt and meet demands to excel in a new system', a skill which I believe is underrated, under measured, and hugely valuable.

Nah, so far as I can tell: it's compliance. It asks the question "Will you do what it takes, even when it's irrational, to pattern yourself after our model?"

Moreover it's painfully easy to exploit your way through especially if you're already rich. Just go doctor shopping with Mommy so you can get a 504 and accomodations and stimulant medications.

If it selected for adaptation the curriculum would be different, things like figuring out the area of a circle using given materials, not abstract shit. If it selected for intelligence there would br a huge battery of exceptions, handicaps for the working class kids, because they have to put in way more effort than the kids living with their parents who are unemployed, likewise with non-traditionals.

The term “504” was new to me - doctor-prescribed academic assistance, apparently.

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/504faq.html

Is this being abused?

You're repeating what I said: adapting to an existing process and finding success within a system is exactly what college teaches and filters on. That's usually a good thing for most job seekers.

I cannot fathom a successful professional that does not balance 'I must innovate the sysyem even if it hurts me' against 'I will work within this system for my own personal benefit by providing exactly what is requested of me'

Both these can be true:

- Rich people can painfully easily exploit something to make their ROI much higher

- That something can be an immensely valuable investment for the non-rich

But how do you know you wouldn't have escaped the factories and warehouses without a degree? In 10 years people can make huge pay jumps.

Maybe, but the road from high school dropout to NASA JPL seems a bit more tenuous when you don't include an education.

bls.gov tells a more complete story, in that machine operators make significantly less and job openings grow at a significantly lower rate than software, aerospace, robotics, and AI specialists, many of which require a degree, (and the siccessful outliers are not worth pushing as a good model for the 90%)

I can't say there wasn't a different, even a better road to some measure of success and an enjoyable career, but I can say this path was a miracle of positive life changes for me and every penny of debt I pay back to the fed is absolutely a victory lap.

This is a looking vs. leaping exercise. Do you continue "looking" around for 10 years or do you "leap" at an opportunity to make a change?

While I see your point - a whole lot of people do have salary increases over a 10 year span - a whole lot of jobs people want require "X piece of paper for Y years of experience" and you cannot get that experience to begin with without either 1) the piece of paper or 2) knowing someone.

I've had to do cognitive ability tests as part of job applications. The test questions are definitely reminiscent of those crappy online IQ tests.

I spent two years in college and never finished. I'm largely self-taught in my field. I also have a great office job. Getting there didn't require an IQ test or a degree, it required consistently providing something of value.