So there was an article on Reddit today about how they don't want art in STEM, and how STEAM is made up by the 'woke left' or 'academic liberals' because it has art in the acronym. Now I don't normally care, I am an economics and IR major. But something is missing from all of this, and if I were to summarize what I want to say about all of this my job/degree is better than yours it's this. The people in power don't care. They are setting you up against each other so that employment quotas are being met so that they don't have to pay you as much. One day art may lead to gainful employment at higher rates, today it's STEM(However that is being eroded due to what I am about to say), another day it's business majors, another day it's going to be trades.
The dumb argument is I am better than you because I took harder classes in college than you, and my degree is better for it because I think I will make more money than you. Why is that dumb, it's because the economy doesn't matter how hard your classes are, or your grades, they mostly just care how you market yourself, and your dynamism for your position. It's all current-day supply and demand.
Another dumb argument is my college is better than your college, therefore I am better than you, or I have a master's degree thus I am better than you. Why is that dumb, college rankings do change. Look at the news, there is investment banking standing that multiple Ivy League college students are blacklisted because of radical political student groups on them. Also with the master's degree, yes you get more training but generally, employers like experience over it.
So why are STEM majors doing this? One they are likely VERY insecure thus projecting confidence. To get good at programming you need to sit down and stare at a computer screen for long periods. Does that sound healthy to you? Staring at a computer screen is yes likely to get you more money if you training yourself with skills using it, but due to opportunity cost you not do something else like networking, meeting friends, doing other hobbies, and exercising. Balance is key, but programmers don't seem to realize that, and the ones that don't need a 'marketable' major as they are already in the top 10, 5, or 1 percent of IQ, and or wealth have connections and know the economic meta to speak. Also, fortune 1000 companies have been axing programmers and other white-collar jobs like crazy. This is likely because programmers trying to project strength at a moment of weakness. Onto engineers, yes you need complicated math that you will never use in the workplace for most jobs, and physics, and maybe Organic chemistry, but what does most of the job entail??? It's just Solidworks for parts, it's their version of MS Excel. I could do that, I used Solidworks in high school, and it was all design guess what's also important in art. Math is not very marketable by itself unless you know programming, and are being tested for the actuary exam, otherwise you likely going to go get a job as a teacher where you will be overworked like the education majors, and somewhat underpaid even in public schools unless you get a masters just like liberal arts.
Another dumb argument is because I took an IQ test, and I am smarter than you, therefore I am better than you. One there are a lot of swaths of MENSA members whose only redeeming quality is their high IQ. They get very little in terms of stuff in their life accomplished. The ones that are smart, and do get 'stuff done' are the people who are are the top in their industries. IQ is not at all indicative of success.
Onto Science: physics, unless you get a masters like the liberal arts, your best bet is investment banking or a job similar to it, and you better know financial software or business software or have internships like everyone else. Biology will get you less than many liberal arts majors as you will have to work as a lab tech, and it's over-supplied in the market.
But Gergar what about the bad majors like music, gender studies, criminology, and hospitality that are easy, and have employers hating on them? What about the bad liberal arts like Sociology, Political science, and even communications? Funny enough I had a communications major laugh at my degree in international relations, but had to go to grad school to get a job, yes that degree won't get you programming jobs or a quantitative investing job, but it depends on your networking skills, and increasingly social media skills which everyone seems to lack given Gen Z hates social interaction I can see a future where that is in demand, and that is true for every one of those majors. Music is a part of everyone's life without dynamic tracks media like movies, games, and TV shows would lose their luster, and we would see suicide rates increase now. Granted you don't need a music degree or theater degree for those jobs, just good looks, and a good voice(which will likely be more common as plastic surgery lowers costs in the future), but music is a vital part of life even if MBAs today can't see it. Criminology and hospitality are facing an undersupply of labor to the point where even if the unemployment statistics don't reflect it now they will in the future due to Genz Zerg rushing the CURRENT marketable degrees, and jobs. (me included somewhat), there won't be enough hotel managers, police officers, and related positions or even academic research on people's wants in the area, and no MBAs and high school grads won't be enough. Crime is increasing, travel is increasing, and eating out is AI-proof and is similar to fashion in recessions it decreases, in booms it increases. So yes we need criminology and hospitality.
Don't even get me started with construction management, everyone made fun of it, now it's booming in every sector and every major city and everywhere in the US. Political science may not be hot right now but it will be in the future due to increased wars, and government turmoil, everyone made fun of it, and now they aren't laughing anymore. Sociology is an interesting one to defend, but society is falling apart everywhere, guess who will have to analyze that? THEM. As for gender studies, I predict we will see a resurgence in it as gender norms change, and most importantly guess who's going to have to solve the men not dating women, and women not dating men, and loneliness crisis, I will give you a hint it's not history majors or programmers or even psychologists or biomedical people all of whom have failed, and made the problem worse with dating apps, in-game transactions, and so fore. It will have to be gender studies that solve it.
So what is true is there is a money-making meta for which jobs make the most money. Yes and no. If it were 5 years ago the answer would be the same as it always is the creators, and business owners who come from every skill, but now it's computer scientists who can learn linear algebra, calc 3, and can program AI like GPT-4, Claude, and so fore, but that will change. The current meta doesn't last forever, and they don't seem to even last years, if a business owner wants to lay X amount of people they don't care what your skillset is they will lay you off, if your company service or product has no customers they will close, and they need more than just STEM to not close they need sales, and they need marketers, and finance, and even maintenance like right now with companies laying off hundreds of thousands of workers.
So why is everyone acting in bad faith? It's because the business owners want people to fill in supply gaps. First, it was getting a college degree since so few had it to beat the USSR so people got all degrees, then it was STEM and tech, and then it was TEM minus the science. Now it's increasingly unclear and more likely the trades. But what is the ONE CONSTANT in all of this, it never stays the same. People who told you to get into tech will be calling you an idiot for not joining the trades, why because people are increasingly lonely, and INSECURE. But money at a certain point creates diminishing margins of returns. You cannot wish away depression and trauma from buying a larger computer, car, house, and so forth. It helps to have a baseline income. Happiness comes from relationships, the money meta always changes. People want to speak highly of their major to make more money and work less grueling jobs so they state their major is better than X to fill their insecurities. Business people and politicians want you to skill-up for the current meta, but once everyone becomes X, X will get oversupplied.
The dumb argument is I am better than you because I took harder classes in college than you, and my degree is better for it because I think I will make more money than you. Why is that dumb, it's because the economy doesn't matter how hard your classes are, or your grades, they mostly just care how you market yourself, and your dynamism for your position. It's all current-day supply and demand.
Another dumb argument is my college is better than your college, therefore I am better than you, or I have a master's degree thus I am better than you. Why is that dumb, college rankings do change. Look at the news, there is investment banking standing that multiple Ivy League college students are blacklisted because of radical political student groups on them. Also with the master's degree, yes you get more training but generally, employers like experience over it.
So why are STEM majors doing this? One they are likely VERY insecure thus projecting confidence. To get good at programming you need to sit down and stare at a computer screen for long periods. Does that sound healthy to you? Staring at a computer screen is yes likely to get you more money if you training yourself with skills using it, but due to opportunity cost you not do something else like networking, meeting friends, doing other hobbies, and exercising. Balance is key, but programmers don't seem to realize that, and the ones that don't need a 'marketable' major as they are already in the top 10, 5, or 1 percent of IQ, and or wealth have connections and know the economic meta to speak. Also, fortune 1000 companies have been axing programmers and other white-collar jobs like crazy. This is likely because programmers trying to project strength at a moment of weakness. Onto engineers, yes you need complicated math that you will never use in the workplace for most jobs, and physics, and maybe Organic chemistry, but what does most of the job entail??? It's just Solidworks for parts, it's their version of MS Excel. I could do that, I used Solidworks in high school, and it was all design guess what's also important in art. Math is not very marketable by itself unless you know programming, and are being tested for the actuary exam, otherwise you likely going to go get a job as a teacher where you will be overworked like the education majors, and somewhat underpaid even in public schools unless you get a masters just like liberal arts.
Another dumb argument is because I took an IQ test, and I am smarter than you, therefore I am better than you. One there are a lot of swaths of MENSA members whose only redeeming quality is their high IQ. They get very little in terms of stuff in their life accomplished. The ones that are smart, and do get 'stuff done' are the people who are are the top in their industries. IQ is not at all indicative of success.
Onto Science: physics, unless you get a masters like the liberal arts, your best bet is investment banking or a job similar to it, and you better know financial software or business software or have internships like everyone else. Biology will get you less than many liberal arts majors as you will have to work as a lab tech, and it's over-supplied in the market.
But Gergar what about the bad majors like music, gender studies, criminology, and hospitality that are easy, and have employers hating on them? What about the bad liberal arts like Sociology, Political science, and even communications? Funny enough I had a communications major laugh at my degree in international relations, but had to go to grad school to get a job, yes that degree won't get you programming jobs or a quantitative investing job, but it depends on your networking skills, and increasingly social media skills which everyone seems to lack given Gen Z hates social interaction I can see a future where that is in demand, and that is true for every one of those majors. Music is a part of everyone's life without dynamic tracks media like movies, games, and TV shows would lose their luster, and we would see suicide rates increase now. Granted you don't need a music degree or theater degree for those jobs, just good looks, and a good voice(which will likely be more common as plastic surgery lowers costs in the future), but music is a vital part of life even if MBAs today can't see it. Criminology and hospitality are facing an undersupply of labor to the point where even if the unemployment statistics don't reflect it now they will in the future due to Genz Zerg rushing the CURRENT marketable degrees, and jobs. (me included somewhat), there won't be enough hotel managers, police officers, and related positions or even academic research on people's wants in the area, and no MBAs and high school grads won't be enough. Crime is increasing, travel is increasing, and eating out is AI-proof and is similar to fashion in recessions it decreases, in booms it increases. So yes we need criminology and hospitality.
Don't even get me started with construction management, everyone made fun of it, now it's booming in every sector and every major city and everywhere in the US. Political science may not be hot right now but it will be in the future due to increased wars, and government turmoil, everyone made fun of it, and now they aren't laughing anymore. Sociology is an interesting one to defend, but society is falling apart everywhere, guess who will have to analyze that? THEM. As for gender studies, I predict we will see a resurgence in it as gender norms change, and most importantly guess who's going to have to solve the men not dating women, and women not dating men, and loneliness crisis, I will give you a hint it's not history majors or programmers or even psychologists or biomedical people all of whom have failed, and made the problem worse with dating apps, in-game transactions, and so fore. It will have to be gender studies that solve it.
So what is true is there is a money-making meta for which jobs make the most money. Yes and no. If it were 5 years ago the answer would be the same as it always is the creators, and business owners who come from every skill, but now it's computer scientists who can learn linear algebra, calc 3, and can program AI like GPT-4, Claude, and so fore, but that will change. The current meta doesn't last forever, and they don't seem to even last years, if a business owner wants to lay X amount of people they don't care what your skillset is they will lay you off, if your company service or product has no customers they will close, and they need more than just STEM to not close they need sales, and they need marketers, and finance, and even maintenance like right now with companies laying off hundreds of thousands of workers.
So why is everyone acting in bad faith? It's because the business owners want people to fill in supply gaps. First, it was getting a college degree since so few had it to beat the USSR so people got all degrees, then it was STEM and tech, and then it was TEM minus the science. Now it's increasingly unclear and more likely the trades. But what is the ONE CONSTANT in all of this, it never stays the same. People who told you to get into tech will be calling you an idiot for not joining the trades, why because people are increasingly lonely, and INSECURE. But money at a certain point creates diminishing margins of returns. You cannot wish away depression and trauma from buying a larger computer, car, house, and so forth. It helps to have a baseline income. Happiness comes from relationships, the money meta always changes. People want to speak highly of their major to make more money and work less grueling jobs so they state their major is better than X to fill their insecurities. Business people and politicians want you to skill-up for the current meta, but once everyone becomes X, X will get oversupplied.
