New 'do no harm' test targets low-earning college degrees

    The same goes for any graduate program whose graduates earn less than someone with only a bachelor's degree.

I've always found that especially interesting. My neighborhood is over 80 years old, never had a single developer build more than a dozen or two houses at a time, and still isn't fully built out, so there's a huge range of house sizes and incomes.

Bachelor's and master's degrees are significantly underrepresented in my neighborhood, but most of the big houses are owned by contractors and small business owners that never earned a bachelor's degree. They're also often immigrants or children of immigrants, usually from poor countries in Eastern Europe or Latin America. The smaller houses, on the other hand, are mostly owned by multi-generation American citizens with doctorate degrees who spent their whole career in comfortable 9-to-5 jobs that were never challenging but never offered much advancement and payed accordingly.

Spending a bunch of time in academia seems to be the low-risk low-reward path to a career, and it also seems to be the group of people complaining the most that a career path is never guaranteed.

Low earning degrees aren’t economically valuable to society. Why aren’t they cancelled outright? What makes them different from learning something on your own for fun?

This is so reasonable and such a low bar to clear. Excited for this as the outcomes for people are happier and easier lives, instead of a lifetime of regret for learning old/outdated concepts at a premium price from teachers who aren't commercially viable in their own fields.

This is misguided at best; money is not the only metric of value