On the other hand, here is someone who has completed a degree and gone beyond. Clearly they have the ability to learn new material. Furthermore, they attained a proficiency at least that of the self taught - no degree segment mentioned above.
Now, given a "you can make $150k/year as a software developer" vs "you can make $100k/year as a ME" there's something to be considered. Additionally, if thats instead a "you can make $70k/year as a junior engineer getting the necessary time to become a licensed engineer for the next few years" ... well, there are student loans to be paid off.
If argument is that they need to pay loans, then computer degrees should also be allowed to learn on the job and do mechanical/civil stuff ?
There is a problem on the hiring end of the software market though where I get flooded with resumes from engineers and data scientists and interviewing them for a software job seems to be a complete crapshoot. Literally the best and worst candidates that we get through. We get some folks with serious traditional engineering chops who can't code (as in solve a problem with software) their way out of a paper bag.
The self-taught developer and CS grad pools seem to be far more consistent, in my experience. I get through less of the very worst people and those are easier to filter in this pool.
If the self-taught/bootcamp junior programmer can nail it while you can't and are asking for twice+ as much money, how do I justify hiring you?