> On the other side of things, why isn't it considered class discrimination to require expensive degrees to work in jobs where high school education is sufficient?
Another question that nobody ever seems to ask: why do all degrees charge basically the same tuition, despite the disparate financial outcomes of holding those degrees?
Society needs people in all different fields. It would be awful if we simply abolished the arts, scholarship, and other non-profitable professions entirely. What a barren world that would be! The question is, how can we financially support necessary activities that aren't particularly lucrative?
Limiting public funding for college students majoring in arts programs hardly equates to abolishing the arts. Of the great artists throughout history, how many even attended higher education programs in that field? The more common path for great artists has been to go out and do more art. Practice makes perfect.
I think we would get better results by shifting arts funding away from education and towards just paying performers to put on free public events or buying art pieces for exhibition in public spaces. Focus on the results rather than the process, and let the artists find their own paths.
Another question that nobody ever seems to ask: why do all degrees charge basically the same tuition, despite the disparate financial outcomes of holding those degrees?
Society needs people in all different fields. It would be awful if we simply abolished the arts, scholarship, and other non-profitable professions entirely. What a barren world that would be! The question is, how can we financially support necessary activities that aren't particularly lucrative?