23% of bachelor's degrees and 43% of master's degrees have a negative ROI
New research suggesting that 23% of bachelor’s degrees and 43% of master’s degrees have a negative financial return reignites debate over whether higher education should be evaluated as an investment. Commenters weigh the high cost of U.S. college, degree-specific earnings, and debt burdens against non-monetary benefits such as personal growth, career flexibility, and societal value. Many argue the real problem is distorted incentives and financing—federal loans, rising tuition, and credential requirements—rather than education itself, and suggest reforms ranging from lower costs and better transparency to de-emphasizing degree requirements in hiring.
ROI vs broader value of education
- Many argue education shouldn’t be reduced to financial ROI; it also brings fulfillment, wisdom, critical thinking, and life experience.
- Others counter that when degrees cost $50k–$300k and create decades of debt, ROI is unavoidable for individuals.
- Several note happiness isn’t determined by income alone, but debt and low earnings can severely undermine well‑being.
Cost, debt, and funding structures
- US tuition is widely viewed as “insane,” especially relative to Europe, where public universities are low-cost or nearly free at point of use.
- Commenters link high prices to easy federal loans, reduced state funding, and university spending on facilities and administration.
- Fixed-rate federal loans and flat tuition across majors are criticized as ignoring differences in earning potential and risk.
Labor market, credentials, and inequality
- Degrees are seen as a screening mechanism employers use to offload training costs and circumvent discrimination constraints.
- Some suggest banning generic degree requirements or allowing direct access to licensing exams (law, medicine) without mandatory school.
- Several warn that more degrees don’t automatically create more high-paying jobs; over-supply can depress wages in saturated fields.
Degree choice, majors, and outcomes
- Thread highlights large ROI variation by major and institution: engineering/CS/nursing at strong schools vs arts, education, some humanities elsewhere.
- Some say many humanities/social-science programs function as low-ROI or negative-ROI “status goods,” especially for already-wealthy students.
- Others stress non-monetary benefits: career changes enabled by master’s degrees, relationships, psychological insight, and personal growth.
Policy and reform ideas
- Proposals:
- Reduce or cap tuition and administrative overhead (ACA-style spending ratios).
- Make public higher ed cheaper/free while tightening academic standards.
- Require transparent program-level outcomes (earnings, debt, career alignment).
- Adjust lending terms or public subsidies by field-level ROI while preserving access.
Data and study criticisms
- Some distrust the cited study’s sponsor and methodology (risk adjustment, counterfactual earnings modeling, use of medians vs means).
- Others dive into the raw ROI tables and note many fields still have positive ROI, and time windows (10 years) may be too short to capture full payoff.