Hello, if you would please refer to "Wage labour and capital":

We have just seen how the fluctuation of supply and demand always bring the price of a commodity back to its cost of production. The actual price of a commodity, indeed, stands always above or below the cost of production; but the rise and fall reciprocally balance each other, so that, within a certain period of time, if the ebbs and flows of the industry are reckoned up together, the commodities will be exchanged for one another in accordance with their cost of production. Their price is thus determined by their cost of production.

...

What, then, is the cost of production of labour-power?

It is the cost required for the maintenance of the labourer as a labourer, and for his education and training as a labourer.

...

Thus, the cost of production of simple labour-power amounts to the cost of the existence and propagation of the worker. The price of this cost of existence and propagation constitutes wages. The wages thus determined are called the minimum of wages. This minimum wage, like the determination of the price of commodities in general by cost of production, does not hold good for the single individual, but only for the race. Individual workers, indeed, millions of workers, do not receive enough to be able to exist and to propagate themselves; but the wages of the whole working class adjust themselves, within the limits of their fluctuations, to this minimum.

The price of education can only fall once the supply of laborer requiring said education falls below the demand of such laborers and, consequently, the price of their labor power rises above the cost of creating this labor power. The (even more) bad news is:

But the productive forces of labour is increased above all by a greater division of labour and by a more general introduction and constant improvement of machinery. The larger the army of workers among whom the labour is subdivided, the more gigantic the scale upon which machinery is introduced, the more in proportion does the cost of production decrease, the more fruitful is the labour.

...

Furthermore, to the same degree in which the division of labour increases, is the labour simplified. The special skill of the labourer becomes worthless. He becomes transformed into a simple monotonous force of production, with neither physical nor mental elasticity. His work becomes accessible to all; therefore competitors press upon him from all sides. Moreover, it must be remembered that the more simple, the more easily learned the work is, so much the less is its cost to production, the expense of its acquisition, and so much the lower must the wages sink – for, like the price of any other commodity, they are determined by the cost of production.

Obtaining education doesn't increase your intelligence.

This may not be a popular opinion but I personally reject the belief that universities have a monopoly on education. In fact I think most are designed to create a more compliant employee.

That said libraries are free, piracy is free, YouTube hosts millions of lectures by experts in their field and can be downloaded to watch or listen offline. I personally have spent the past couple years learning about the affects of US imperialism and haven’t spent a cent on it

gatekeeping

There are all sorts of classes available at top schools via opencourseware. You can take the highest tier courses that the US has to offer, and become educated. While not degree offering, it still would look great on a CV, if you can somehow prove you did the work.

Free books. A few years ago, I read a free electrical engineering book available on the internet, which I found fascinating. It has been a little helpful in practice as well, but I think it’s just cool to know how capacitors and motors work. Public libraries exist for a reason. Gutenberg is another option.

Many 2 year community colleges are now free tuition if you reside in the state.

And of course, there are still ways to get a degree cheap, if the paper is important to you. I finally landed at WGU 15 years ago and it was very reasonable, and has paid dividends on my original investment.

For centuries it was called "gatekeeping." Education is the means of mobility. The elites want that limited.

It was never about paying to get smarter. The original purpose of universities/higher education is long gone. It is now about paying to be accepted by high society and indoctrinating you. As Rockefeller said, I want a nation of workers, not thinkers.

because rich people dont want competition, so some fields are gatekept. like professorships, medical doctors, research scientists, probably admins that arnt acquired through nepotism. if have been a job forum alot of positions are taken by nepotism in general. research heavily gatekpt, by placing a arbitrary amount x years of experience in job listings even at the entry level. Also the top prestigious schools often breed elitist ass students too, they think they are entitled to certain jobs, or if they become professor, they think the way its taught should be higher than it would for that college.

some people are saying degrees are useless, they are if you are getting one without doing research on it before applying, thats on you. trades is not as easy to get in as you think, even if doesnt require it.

It doesn't? You're paying for brand recognition and a piece of paper that says you can follow directions and spend money. Learning is free. Don't let capitalism tell you what's important.

Honestly you can't even buy an education outside of some technical fields needed in the economy. The only way to really become educated is to be a life long enjoyer of knowledge across many domains. There is almost no educated people left anymore since all of that has gone to the way side to make room for authoritarianism and orwellianism. Economics is a great example. Go to the most prestigious schools in the U.S and you will not learn even the most basic principles and facts of economics. Law is the same. You will not learn law as it actually is, but this totalitarian mindrot version of law.

Because billionaires have an interest in remaining billionaires, and if everyone was smart, there'd be more people tearing down the structures that consolidate wealth and maintain wealth inequality.

Because capitalism

Private lessons don't make you smarter. They just make you more well equipped with.

I am a lifetime student. I am not smarter. I am not a smarty pant

Cause people will pay it