I'm scraping time together to read a lengthy post and now I have to unhide comments and factor in time stamps? I wanted to understand the debate before I chimed in with my two cents, but I'm going to throw my hands in the air and shake my head instead....and wait for the tuition bubble to burst.. I guess...

Eudaimonia, I'm struggling to see the vitriol in AJ's comments that deserved your "three strikes policy". He made what appeared to me to be valid points which you just happened to disagree with. I couldn't find any post where he misrepresented your comments except once when he promptly apologized. But that's a judgement call you have to make.

Here's my take:
Our current marketplace places employment value on a piece of paper - for better or for worse. My current employer viewed my undergraduate and MBA degrees in high favor and - coupled with my experience - offered me a good job I wouldn't have had without it. What is at question in your proposition is the actual valuation of that particular piece of paper and whether or not it represents anything of true value to a potential employer. So the question is in analyzing and dividing intrinsic from extrinsic value.

Can we make the generalized inference that because of the preponderance of self-professed liberals in higher education that such life philosophies will have a bearing on their students through their teaching? To me, that is a reasonable deduction on your part and one which has enough support to stand with the caveat that - given the differences in political climate from state to state - individual institutions will be affected to different degrees (pun intended). It should also be taken into account that the nature of the program itself lends itself to bias - it's pretty hard to argue Keynesian economics given the history we have to look at, but not hard at all to argue relative morality in a psychology or philosophy class. What should be noted is that the internal value of any of these degrees is going to be directly related to the field of employment - a history degree (unless you are Carly Fiorina) is not going to take you far in Computer Science, neither will a Philosophy degree take you far in Construction Management.

That being said, much of the value of a degree is culturally assumed. Employers don't know what one actually studied without looking at a transcript. I think it is only fair to question this assumed value, as you did.

The question you raise, however, is whether or not 1) the valuation of a degree is being accurately assessed, and 2) whether or not the universities themselves are falsely promoting a value which does not exist to the point that merit exists for filing a general lawsuit. The problem with a false advertising claim is that you have to establish that there was a reasonable expectation for implied contractual obligations. That's a pretty high standard of proof to meet under our current cultural mores and system of education because it isn't the universities per se which are making those advertising claims, but all of society from high school to business. There is no question that a person with a degree exhibits higher lifelong earning potential, which is going to be the claim made by universities in their support. And the lack of any overt claims by the universities that a graduate is guaranteed a job is similarly a high burden-of-proof barrier to any successful lawsuit. While I see substantial flaws in the current educational system, I think the claim that universities are systematically and intentionally committing fraud en masse is a bridge too far for me given the alternatives of choice which exist - though individual assertions very well may prove to contain substantial merit.

Sheesh, have a drink and calm down. I never misrepresented anything you said. You asked "should unemployed grads sure their universities"

Pardon e for thinking differently than you (yes, you provoked my sarcasm. It does take quite a bit.)

You acted like an ape with a club. Strike me a third time tough guy.

I spent the day getting points taken away and being threatened with a "strike" (?) for expressing my contrasting view to the OP. First time that happened here. This is an odd post indeed.

Just be sure to disagree with my actual points!