Liberal Arts Majors unite!

[MrsK]

I see so much on this forum about STEM majors and a focus on getting degrees that make the most money.  I majored in Art History and have done just fine.  I have no regrets about my degree and still find most topics in the Humanities fascinating.  I work in corporate America and I think all of those classes in politics, literature and art add tremendous value. 

Just wondering if there are others out there with "useless" degrees who have no regrets . . .

[senecando]

I try to stay out of the fight, but my BA is in, literally, "Liberal Arts". I went to a school that only offered that program.

[RetiredAt63]

My degrees got me interesting jobs but not a lot of money - B. Sc., M. Sc. in Biology, Dipl. in Ecotoxicology. As you can see I didn't retire particularly early.  But I did enjoy my job, mostly.

My DD just graduated with a BA in Psych and has a nice full-time job starting today,  good salary, benefits.  It takes all kinds to make a society function. This site is lopsided in job areas (or maybe they are just more vocal!).  And it seem to be the engineers and software people who are most desperate to escape.

[jka468]

Age: 44

You graduated around 1992, before the internet and mass efficiency of computers in the workforce, and now most high paying jobs require certain technical skills. While any major can still make it today, liberal arts majors currently have a much tougher hill to climb as seen by unemployment/underemployment rates for recent liberal arts grads over the past few years.

Edit: I think that as long as someone knows what they are getting into with whatever major they decide to study (albeit this is hard for most 18yos to conceptualize) then there shouldn't be a problem. The issue now is the hoardes of lib arts majors who think their basket weaving degree from State U should automatically land them a 60k+/yr job right out of college, and then they foam at the mouth when they finally realize 6 months after graduation that Starbucks is the only place that will hire them. There is too much misinformation out there, and pie in the sky thinking, which has now lead to the non-STEM backlash.

[Fodder]

French Lit degree here.

I work in government communications.  It's an interesting job, because I work with very smart, very wordy people, and my job is to take what they tell me and explain it in a way that everyone will (ideally) be able to understand it.

I'm 34.

I will agree with jka468, you can't just be a blue-sky thinker.  You do need practical skills, but you don't need a degree in engineering to acquire them.  Obviously, in addition to my brilliant literary analysis skills (lol), I've also mastered practical skills like typing, word processing, basic web site design, photography, social media (this is an ever-evolving skill). 

But the strategic thinking and analytical skills are really the core of my job - looking at a complex, nuanced issue, figuring out what's happening and how we are going to explain it (i.e., key messages) and then tactics to ensure the messages are heard by the right people.

[GuitarStv]

Would you recommend an Art History major as a relatively sure way to find a good paying career?

[Poopsio]

Technically anything that isn't engineering or applied arts (music) or nursing is a "liberal art" major...and that includes a lot of science majors too.

I think you may mean "humanities"..."liberal arts" includes things like evolutionary biology, statistics, music history, english, neuroscience, etc...

[senecando]

Would you recommend an Art History major as a relatively sure way to find a good paying career?

No. Whose position are you challenging with this question?

[sheepstache]

But the strategic thinking and analytical skills are really the core of my job - looking at a complex, nuanced issue, figuring out what's happening and how we are going to explain it (i.e., key messages) and then tactics to ensure the messages are heard by the right people.

That's what I see as being the value a lot of people overlook.

I know several STEM types who are dissatisfied because they think their technical skills should force the market to suck their dick. They dream of being that person who's so good at one specialized thing that the market comes crawling to them. They don't get that the really well-paid STEM types have other soft skills and smart strategies backing them up.

You can't just sit there like a slug and expect tons of money just because of your major. Whereas I know lots of go-getters with liberal arts majors who make beaucoup moolah because they're dominant, leadership personalities. I do agree that if you know you're not, technical skills are a safer bet. But for plenty of people the fact that they could achieve greater competence in a non-STEM field would outweigh that.

Aside from all that, I'm reminded of something I was told about Roman society. The underclass was allowed to learn about engineering; only the upperclass learned rhetoric, the ability to convince others of your ideas.

[Poopsio]

Would you recommend an Art History major as a relatively sure way to find a good paying career?

No. Whose position are you challenging with this question?

If you have an inroad into a position like a contact at a museum or think you could make those connections, a degree in art history could get you far. Do your research and be confident you could fill in the spot you're looking at. Watch Antique Roadshow on PBS--all those guys are art history majors. Go to a good school, polish your speaking and rhetoric skills, get into the subject, learn it, ace the tests...there's no reason why you won't be able to get a job in the field.

[Gerard]

I got a linguistics degree in 2002, post-doc'ed, found high-paying work in 2006. Presumably the job market hasn't completely shifted over to requiring STEM degrees since then.

Would I recommend linguistics, or art history, or whatever, as a fast track to a high income? No, but I wouldn't recommend anything for that. And I wouldn't do a degree solely for the perceived high income (the "university is welding school with thicker books" perspective).

[Poopsio]

I got a linguistics degree in 2002, post-doc'ed, found high-paying work in 2006. Presumably the job market hasn't completely shifted over to requiring STEM degrees since then.

Would I recommend linguistics, or art history, or whatever, as a fast track to a high income? No, but I wouldn't recommend anything for that. And I wouldn't do a degree solely for the perceived high income (the "university is welding school with thicker books" perspective).

Especially perceived higher income of professional careers like law, medicine, etc. Tuition really equalizes a lot of careers. Check this out. http://graphaday.blogspot.com/2010/04/doctor-salary-vs-ups-driver.html

[senecando]

Would you recommend an Art History major as a relatively sure way to find a good paying career?

No. Whose position are you challenging with this question?

If you have an inroad into a position like a contact at a museum or think you could make those connections, a degree in art history could get you far. Do your research and be confident you could fill in the spot you're looking at. Watch Antique Roadshow on PBS--all those guys are art history majors. Go to a good school, polish your speaking and rhetoric skills, get into the subject, learn it, ace the tests...there's no reason why you won't be able to get a job in the field.

I don't disagree.

I'm just saying that the argument in this thread has never been about "sure ways" to find lucrative careers; it doesn't really make sense to argue against someone who found her degree valuable and interesting by asking if she'd recommend it for other, important-to-guitarstv ("good paying career") reasons. Doesn't follow at all.

[Poopsio]

Would you recommend an Art History major as a relatively sure way to find a good paying career?

No. Whose position are you challenging with this question?

If you have an inroad into a position like a contact at a museum or think you could make those connections, a degree in art history could get you far. Do your research and be confident you could fill in the spot you're looking at. Watch Antique Roadshow on PBS--all those guys are art history majors. Go to a good school, polish your speaking and rhetoric skills, get into the subject, learn it, ace the tests...there's no reason why you won't be able to get a job in the field.

I don't disagree.

I'm just saying that the argument in this thread has never been about "sure ways" to find lucrative careers; it doesn't really make sense to argue against someone who found her degree valuable and interesting by asking if she'd recommend it for other, important-to-guitarstv ("good paying career") reasons. Doesn't follow at all.

I agree, I think someone who is destined to do what I recommended probably has something in their mind most people don't have and that's perseverence and really a conviction that they will get what comes on the other end. I think that's why it's so important to really find out what you want to do because that desire probably makes the difference. Fortunately the barista market seems to be recession-proof but I wish our society appreciated fine arts more than coffee sometimes...

[SisterX]

I'm 31, got my degree in literature with a minor in music performance.  I'm not highly paid (just started bringing home about $30,000, plus whatever I put into retirement--I just checked the box next to "max allowed", so I don't know the percentage) but I work in a mustachian field (I work in a library) that I respect and enjoy.  Also, I wrote a book which is being mulled over by an editor, so I'm really putting my degree to use.
I also do musical ventures on the side (not much money, but it's so damn fun!) so I'm even using my minor. 
Would I recommend my path?  Well, to some yes and others no.  I would say that it all depends on ability, interest and, yes, drive.  Writing a book is useless if you don't have the courage and the wherewithal to send it out to publishers, or to self-publish.  Music performance is not for people who hate putting on a show.  Working in a library wouldn't do for those who require a fast-paced job, who can't handle politics (you betcha) or working with people (oh gawd, the people sometimes!), or those who are ONLY looking for a well-paying job.
I'd say that, as a group, mustachians tend to be smart enough to make the most of what they've got, whether or not the world tells them they're making good choices and despite/because of the hand they've been dealt.  My eyes glaze over when mechanical stuff comes up, I've just never had an interest in it.  But I love books, and I've been employed since I graduated.  Why is it considered ok on this site to dump on people just because they didn't get an engineering degree, or become a plumber if they had no interest in said engineering degree?  As someone upthread said, it takes all types to make society work, and I'm frankly proud of my degree whether or not other people deem it "useless".  I don't think it is, nor would I even if I was unemployed.  I got a lot of value out of the learning.

[GuitarStv]

Would you recommend an Art History major as a relatively sure way to find a good paying career?

No. Whose position are you challenging with this question?

I'm trying to explain why you see so much focus on STEM degrees in this forum.  If I can elaborate:

With an engineering degree you have a relatively sure way to find a good paying career.  With an art history degree you don't.  (Wait, before you jump all over me . . . I'm not saying you can't find a good or worthwhile job with an arts degree!  You totally can.  But it's not as sure a thing.  You have to work harder to find a good paying job, and the odds are stacked against you.  Also note - I'm not saying that an art history degree is easy.  I'm not saying that you have to be smarter to get a STEM degree.)

People are often confused about this.  You don't need to pay a butt ton of money to learn stuff in a university.  We live in the information age.  Libraries, the internet, study groups, online forums.  Sufficiently motivated, there's very little that can't be learned under self direction on your own time.  A degree is just a bit of dead tree with scratchings on it that you use to get a job.  If you learn stuff while getting your degree . . . cool!  That's a nice side bonus.  But at the end of the day you want the little piece of paper that gets you the best job.  Going to university solely to learn is a waste of money.

If someone on this forum is asking for a good return on investment for their education, and they had interests in both Art History and Engineering . . . I would consider it irresponsible to recommend the former.  That's not to say that engineers are inherently better people or anything of the sort (we're not).  It's not to say that it's impossible to get a good job with an Art History degree (obviously the OP has found one, and hell my mom double majored in English and Philosophy and found a decent job teaching elementary school).  It's just that the odds are that engineering will give better ROI.  You will find a job more easily, your job will pay more, you can save more, you can retire earlier . . .

Just my 2 cents.

[hdatontodo]

My oldest sister was a nurse.

My 2nd oldest sister had an Art History degree and worked as a secretary at a University, eventually working in HR then student accounts. Then she got laid off and worked in a book store in a mall and then worked at an apartment complex.

My 3rd oldest sister had a Psych degree but got into the IRS computer training program for anyone with a degree. She's still in IT.

My 4th oldest sister had a Soc degree which led nowhere. Then she got a Masters that led nowhere. Then she got her PhD and had to move from the east coast to OH to find a teaching job.

My bro got a Materials Engineering Degree and a Nuclear Engineering degree and works for the Gov't.

I started with a Bus Mgmt degree but got a CS degree shortly after that. I work in IT.

My ex had an art degree and worked on a prison magazine, then she went to law school.

[Gerard]

Going to university solely to learn is a waste of money.

Going to university solely to learn facts you can look up elsewhere, probably. But what kind of idiot goes to university for that?

I happened across this short David Mitchell video this morning, and it reminded me of this thread:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AYcU2nhnZg

[MrsK]

Would you recommend an Art History major as a relatively sure way to find a good paying career?

This is interesting for me to think about.  The thing is I have never worked in my field of college study.  After school, I took a low paying corporate job and let them pay for an MBA I got part-time over many years, and then I moved around a lot to move up--but after 10 years I hit the 6 figure income and now make $140K a year in marketing/advertising.

I think my career has been all about what I did after college--I didn't have any network (I moved here from France after college!)

I think it is important to note that now an education costs far more than it did in the late 80s so it is more of a commitment.  But I just wanted to point out that if people are thinking about earning potential only, then I have many smart computer people (STEM and business majors) who work for me--I oversee all of the corporate websites--and make a lot less than I do.

The advice I have given my daughter is to just graduate debt-free and then you have so many more options.  So she is going to community college in order to do this.

[GuitarStv]

Going to university solely to learn is a waste of money.

Going to university solely to learn facts you can look up elsewhere, probably. But what kind of idiot goes to university for that?

I happened across this short David Mitchell video this morning, and it reminded me of this thread:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AYcU2nhnZg

So, based on the video posted you feel that the educational value of going to university is in dicking around and discovering yourself?  There are much cheaper ways to do this.

[thecornercat]

BA in English. Classic! I found a job (not barista) right out of university, but never high-paying. Wouldn't change a thing, though. My family is in computer science, mostly, so I know that world and grew up in it. It didn't make me happy (I was on the couch, reading). I don't think I would have been good at swallowing that pill at 18 and pushing myself through a degree doing something I felt unhappy about, and then follow that up with the same workplace. But then again, at 18 it never occurred to me that I may only have to be doing that for 10-12 years if I was smart about it. The idea of early retirement may have changed everything...

[senecando]

...
A degree is just a bit of dead tree with scratchings on it that you use to get a job.  If you learn stuff while getting your degree . . . cool!  That's a nice side bonus.  But at the end of the day you want the little piece of paper that gets you the best job.
...

This is what's up for debate. If that was the obvious purpose of the four years of college, then yeah, everyone ought to study petroleum engineering.

There are people for whom that was not the only (or even primary) reason to go to college. They aren't going to use the same ROI calculation because their expected return isn't (entirely) a higher salary.

[justajane]

History Ph.D. here.

It would be interesting to compare job satisfaction in general. I really don't know where the scales would tip between doing what you love and making a decent clip. Of course many engineers probably love what they are doing, but more often than not, the thrust of the arguments on this forum is that one should major in STEM because it is well paying. To me, that is foolish and bound to backfire.

Having said that, I wish I had been more realistic in my early twenties. That would have kept me from going to graduate school in the humanities, which was indeed a mistake. I majored in German and could have parlayed that into a career in international business. But no, no. I wanted to escape working for the man and embrace the life of the mind for much longer. Rubbish, especially in light of the academic job market.

If I wanted to FIRE, I would rather do it at a slower pace in a job that I loved than a job that I didn't. Kudos to those of you who can do both, but for those of us that love history or novels or writing, it is not always the case.

What I can't stand is the notion that all humanities major are somehow working at McDonalds or Walmart. This is such an exaggeration. If you polled these workers, most of them probably don't have a college degree at all.

In general, the MMM crowd puts high incomes on a pedestal, which I guess makes sense considering peoples' goals to retire early. But I don't let it for a minute shape my view of what ultimately makes a person happy or fulfilled. Not everyone can make over $100,000, and I don't think that a humanities major pulling $50,000 (or even less) is doing so badly. That's not poverty wages in most of the country.

[greaper007]

...
A degree is just a bit of dead tree with scratchings on it that you use to get a job.  If you learn stuff while getting your degree . . . cool!  That's a nice side bonus.  But at the end of the day you want the little piece of paper that gets you the best job.
...

This is what's up for debate. If that was the obvious purpose of the four years of college, then yeah, everyone ought to study petroleum engineering.

There are people for whom that was not the only (or even primary) reason to go to college. They aren't going to use the same ROI calculation because their expected return isn't (entirely) a higher salary.

If only I didn't have  a soul, petroleum engineering would be awesome.    I couldn't see myself making money off of global warming though.    I dk, the misery of others bothers me.    It's one of the reasons I got out of aviation (buring 1000s of lbs of jet A to ferry 3 people home didn't really fit with my values).

Anyways, don't believe the hype.   A degree is just a degree.     Case in point, my wife has a PhD in psycholgy and makes 6 figures with her own consulting firm.    My dad has an english major, he was a navy fighter pilot and makes $300k as an airline pilot.   

If you want to make lots of money you can find a way.   I think what a lot of people don't realize is that many of us with humanities, liberal arts degrees aren't really chasing money.   We're chasing knowledge, philosophy or maybe just a more symbiotic place in the world.     I was always fairly advanced with computers as a kid, but I chose to get a history degree instead.    I was on track to make 6 figures by the end of my 20s, but I quit my job to be a stay at home dad instead.    Choose happiness, that usually isn't a salary.

Also, I know a lot of people get hung up on er on this forum.   But there's another tack that you can take.    That's adjusting your lifestyle to live happily on a lower salary in a job that you enjoy.   In many ways this is the exact same thing as early retirement.   

[sheepstache]

I do think this is an interesting possible conflict in mustachianism. As Senecando pithily put it in another thread, what's with the obsession with which career you pick in a forum that's all about not letting your job control your life? Ultimately I see that as the point. And the disagreement is just because people go about it differently. On one end of the spectrum, you maximize your earning power no matter what to FI asap. On the other, you use the principles of living frugally to make a living wage out of whatever income level your chosen job provides even if FI takes longer.

Since the point of the thread was about our particular degrees and presumably not just another generic STEM vs. other debate, I should say: Joint linguistics and psychology BA. Worked at a literary agency and then transitioned to being a stagehand. Not that I'm proud of this, but I'm just not much of a go-getter so part of my calculation was that I wouldn't have made much money in a "better bet" field, so why add a ton of stress? Once you discount force of personality, the bottom rungs of creative jobs are a better bet than technical ones where you're at risk of being replaced by a small shell script or the overseas call center.

[Cpa Cat]

You can't just sit there like a slug and expect tons of money just because of your major.

I started off with a BA in Economics. I had to be dynamic, think on my feet.

Then I got a Masters in Accounting. I specialize in a couple of areas of tax. Now people basically just shovel money into my slug mouth.

[greaper007]

History Ph.D. here...
What I can't stand is the notion that all humanities major are somehow working at McDonalds or Walmart. This is such an exaggeration. If you polled these workers, most of them probably don't have a college degree at all.

In general, the MMM crowd puts high incomes on a pedestal, which I guess makes sense considering peoples' goals to retire early. But I don't let it for a minute shape my view of what ultimately makes a person happy or fulfilled. Not everyone can make over $100,000, and I don't think that a humanities major pulling $50,000 (or even less) is doing so badly. That's not poverty wages in most of the country.

Many mid career salaries are fairly close between stem and lib arts degrees.   http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Degrees_that_Pay_you_Back-sort.html    So really, the only thing you're chasing is a starting salary.    If you love the job, then a high starting salary is fantastic.    Otherwise, it's only going to motivate you so much.

[SisterX]

Would you recommend an Art History major as a relatively sure way to find a good paying career?

No. Whose position are you challenging with this question?

I'm trying to explain why you see so much focus on STEM degrees in this forum.  If I can elaborate:

With an engineering degree you have a relatively sure way to find a good paying career.  With an art history degree you don't.  (Wait, before you jump all over me . . . I'm not saying you can't find a good or worthwhile job with an arts degree!  You totally can.  But it's not as sure a thing.  You have to work harder to find a good paying job, and the odds are stacked against you.  Also note - I'm not saying that an art history degree is easy.  I'm not saying that you have to be smarter to get a STEM degree.)

People are often confused about this.  You don't need to pay a butt ton of money to learn stuff in a university.  We live in the information age.  Libraries, the internet, study groups, online forums.  Sufficiently motivated, there's very little that can't be learned under self direction on your own time.  A degree is just a bit of dead tree with scratchings on it that you use to get a job.  If you learn stuff while getting your degree . . . cool!  That's a nice side bonus.  But at the end of the day you want the little piece of paper that gets you the best job.  Going to university solely to learn is a waste of money.

If someone on this forum is asking for a good return on investment for their education, and they had interests in both Art History and Engineering . . . I would consider it irresponsible to recommend the former.  That's not to say that engineers are inherently better people or anything of the sort (we're not).  It's not to say that it's impossible to get a good job with an Art History degree (obviously the OP has found one, and hell my mom double majored in English and Philosophy and found a decent job teaching elementary school).  It's just that the odds are that engineering will give better ROI.  You will find a job more easily, your job will pay more, you can save more, you can retire earlier . . .

Just my 2 cents.

From my experience getting my literature degree, I couldn't disagree more that I could learn all of that by myself.  Because the point of pretty much all of my classes over a certain point wasn't "this is how you cite a source" or some BS like that.  You should already know that.  The meat of the classes over the 101 level is about the discussion of ideas.  Sure, you can discuss things online, but clearly that leads to some mistakes about other people's intents/missing the point.  Having a dynamic discussion between a group of very smart people...there's no substitute.  You might say, "Start a book club!" but my professors led the discussions in very interesting ways, which someone with less school-type learning might not be able to do, or wouldn't think of.  So you might think my degree is just a fancy piece of paper and I wasted my time paying money to read books and talk about them, but I will always feel that I got good value for my money.  I learned so much.
College, and school in general, is not for everyone.  One of the smartest people I know never finished his degree because learning in that type of setting just sucked for him.  I got horrible grades through primary school because I was so frickin' bored.  Got to college and bloomed.  For me, it was one of the best things I've ever done.

[GuitarStv]

It's entirely possible that my perspective is warped by experience.  I've never found value in a classroom setting.  Learn by doing is all that works for me.  For all of third and fourth year I skipped all classes, only going to school to hand in assignments, do labs, and show up for exams.  My grades significantly improved by doing this, as there were suddenly extra hours each day to learn.

University was a lot of fun once I figured this out.  It freed up time to play guitar with people, teach martial arts classes, and get into various hi-jinx.  Kinda set up the model for the rest of my life . . . get engineering work done quickly, do all the fun stuff in your spare time afterwards.

[Gerard]

you feel that the educational value of going to university is in dicking around and discovering yourself?  There are much cheaper ways to do this.

Yes, that's exactly the value of university! Among many many other things. And it should be cheaper than it is. Because it's not all that expensive to deliver a decent university experience in programmes that don't require particle accelerators.

The problem with trying to dick around and discover yourself on your own is that you're 19 and stupid. Even 19-year-olds know that they don't know how to write code, or rattle off names of tendons. But they don't know that they don't know how to construct an argument, or evaluate/accept opposing viewpoints, or figure out what the hell is wrong with them. So this is actually a useful purpose for a university.

Based on other posts, I think Stv and I kind of agree about some stuff: memorizing shit is a bad reason to go to class.  Shooting the shit, on the other hand...

[driftwood]

After I got out of the Army I went to Prescott College in AZ for a BA in Wilderness Leadership.  Spent a few years playing outside, funded by the GI Bill, getting college credit.  Had a strange mix at my school in the Liberal Arts programs:  Lots of hippies, trustafarians, vegetarians, peskatarians, tree-huggers, and former military who really like to play outside.  Made for good discussions and a crazy group dynamic.

Used my degree to comission in the Air Force, which was is huge pay raise from anything else I could've done with it.  My current job as a Logistics Readiness Officer has absolutly nothing to do with my B.A., but it did check the 'degree' box for me.

[boy_bye]

1994: Received BA in Creative Writing and Literary and Cultural Studies

1995: Went to work at the startup of a friend's friend -- started out writing documentation, ended up bossing everyone around

2005: Left that company to go do a similar job on the customer side

2012: Came back to the first company

Yup. The most lucrative part of college for me was the people I met. I enjoyed my studies, and the bit of growing up I did at college, but I learned about my software development job on the job.

At least I'm finally finished paying off the student loans ...

[DeepEllumStache]

Another Liberal Arts major over here and I definitely hear the "one degree to rule them all" mindset in the forums.  My philosophy is that I'd rather work a little longer and love my degree/job than be miserable for a combined 12 years to retire at 30.   

For me, Engineering would have made me miserable.  I graduated with a Psychology degree in 2005 after starting out in Engineering.  Liberal Arts was a blast but I recognize that it required a lot of hustle to get a job.  2 years later went back for my MBA and found a perfect home in Finance.  This job also required a large amount of hustle to get but that's more because the economy was in the toilet.

My sister has an English degree, had a few jobs before landing at a growing tech company.  They love her since she's the one who can communicate between the sales team and the engineers.

My brother got a History degree and finally ended up in Pharmacy school where he seems happy.

[MarciaB]

Undergrad degree in history. Subsequent to that an MBA that opened a lot of doors. But those four years studying/learning at a rigorous college where I got my butt kicked were great. The critical thinking, the debate, the research, the extensive writing...makes me tired (and very grateful!) just thinking about it. I use those skills every day on the job and wouldn't be nearly as effective without them. My field is business.

The MBA...got 21 years ago at a state university for the princely sum of about $5000. Needless to say, the ROI on that has been mighty good. But it's a degree best used as an overlay onto something else (architecture, education, construction, medicine, law, engineering...you get the picture).

[arebelspy]

I have a Philosophy degree.

My wife has an English degree.

We both have Master's degrees in education.

[SporeSpawn]

BA in English (with Instructional Technology minor), MLIS in Library Science. BA: 2012. MLIS: 2013.

Months to first full time job after MLIS: 2 (Had to wait for my lease to run out)

Months to first full time job in my field after MLIS: 5 (Had to wait for the position to open)

Time spent unemployed: 0 (by any metric)

Debt Accrued: 0

Money spent: ~$4,000

Like I've said elsewhere, you can talk about dreams and metrics all you want. Nothing, however, beats a plan. I knew what I wanted, I knew how to get there. When the plan didn't work perfectly (that 4k you see), I had a backup. I didn't go into college blind and pointlessly, nor did I force myself to "follow the money" as if I could magically scry what piece of paper would perfectly get me a job. I went in knowing what I wanted, how to get it, and prepared to do what it took to make it without losing my livelihood in the process.

[Helvegen]

Foreign Language BA checking in.

I really enjoy office admin type work since my first job at it when I was 15. Technically you don't need a degree to do it, but quite frankly, most of my employers hired me because of it. So I guess it was worth it? I'll never be raking in the six figures with it alone, but it pays the bills, offers great benefits, and I can basically find this kind of work anywhere I'd want to move to.

I've never been driven by money, so no I didn't go to school to get a high paying job. I did it because I like school and going to class and writing papers and learning new stuff. Hell, if it were free, I'd STILL be there. In a perfect world, I'd be a career student.
 

[MrsPotato]

I have a BA in Political Science and a Master of Public Administration. I just finished my masters in August and have a job with a private consulting firm. It doesn't pay much, about $36k, but it's my first actual job so I'm content-ish (hoping to get a cushy government job with a pension in the future). Funny enough, I took engineering in my first undergrad semester in the hopes of becoming a civil engineer, but I really didn't enjoy it so I switched to arts. Now that I'm part of the MMM crew, I regret not completing engineering. I would be happy working a job I don't like if it were just for 10 years. I look forward to being FI and spending my days lazing in the sun on a beach somewhere. I find that I don't particularly like working in general (I worked several part-time jobs during my studies - waitress, caregiver, telemarketing, grocery store clerk), so it really would have been a bonus if I could retire early.

Lucky for me, I married a man who is on board with mustachianism and makes more than I do. So we're able to put away all of my income and half of his, so retirement isn't too far away.

So my verdict on a liberal arts education... I think those kinds of degrees are for people who are wealthy and want to spend their time learning something they love. For us average folk trying to get by, I think engineering, accounting, medicine and law are better choices.

[greaper007]

You know, as much as people like to tout the starting salary of stem degrees  no one is really acknowledging the deep dark secret.     The people that are generally paid the most in an organization are the sales people.    I'd venture to say the wealthiest people I've ever met had little if any formal education.    But they could all sell things and lead people.

I'd probably encourage a kid that wanted to make moeny to learn how to sell and lead before they learned engineering, math, history or english.   

Case in point, as a kid I knew a guy that was hanging sheet rock and ended up owning a head hunting firm.   I'd venture that his net worth was north of 20 million.     I also worked for a guy that owned  a golf course.    He started off as a lowly assistant pro and ended up owning all kinds of steel related business.   By the time I knew him he spent most of the day drinking Johnny Walker.

The whole stem vs humanities thing is a red herring if we're talking about earnings.    You make money when you can do something that no one else can.   Sure, designing a great product might fall into that category, but selling it is always more important.   

[justajane]

You know, as much as people like to tout the starting salary of stem degrees  no one is really acknowledging the deep dark secret.     The people that are generally paid the most in an organization are the sales people.    I'd venture to say the wealthiest people I've ever met had little if any formal education.    But they could all sell things and lead people.

I'd probably encourage a kid that wanted to make moeny to learn how to sell and lead before they learned engineering, math, history or english.   

Case in point, as a kid I knew a guy that was hanging sheet rock and ended up owning a head hunting firm.   I'd venture that his net worth was north of 20 million.     I also worked for a guy that owned  a golf course.    He started off as a lowly assistant pro and ended up owning all kinds of steel related business.   By the time I knew him he spent most of the day drinking Johnny Walker.

The whole stem vs humanities thing is a red herring if we're talking about earnings.    You make money when you can do something that no one else can.   Sure, designing a great product might fall into that category, but selling it is always more important.   

This a great point. A family member of mine does not have a college degree, and he spend his career selling sports equipment to sports facilities. He made over $300,000 a year. This is not unusual if you are a good salesman and schmoozer and get in with the right company.

I'm not a fan of MLMs, but a woman at my church got into one early and is now an "executive seller" who probably makes not much less than a doctor in the church. In other words, in a little under a year, she likely became one of the highest earners in our entire church. In contrast, the doctor had to train for years and has lots and lots of loans. I imagine this MLM income won't last forever, but if she was Mustachian, she could probably retire in a few years if she wanted.

Two of my family members sold various software to college libraries, and they  both pulled in over 100K. I'm sure we could all come up with people in sales who are/were high earners, mainly because most people aren't good at it and find it distasteful. If you can overcome your initial dislike of it, I imagine you could make lots of money.

[DecD]

My husband got his undergrad in Journalism, and straight out of college got a good job as a technical writer.  Had the company pay for an MBA.  Got a good job at the same company as a manager in manufacturing.  Then got a PhD (fully funded, of course) and is now a university business professor.

I, on the other hand, have a PhD in engineering.

I make a bit more than him at the moment, but only because I've chosen to work in industry rather than academia.  In similar jobs, he actually probably has a bit more earning power.  Either way, we both make 6 figures, but only one of us is in STEM.

I disagree that I could have learned everything I've learned without formal higher education.  Of course, between my undergrad, masters degrees and the PhD, I was in formal higher education for 13 years, so I'd better think it was valuable or that would be a lot of regretted years. 

And besides, the goal here isn't You Must Follow The Proscribed Path To Riches.  It's all about what you want to fill your life with.  If I'd stayed at my first job out of my masters (heck if I'd skipped the second masters, which was accomplished via a year in France), I'd have reached FI much sooner.  But boy did I enjoy that year in France.  And boy did I have fun indulging in several years of pure research on a topic that I was really interested in.  And those years working on the PhD gave me ultimate flexibility to follow my own interests as well as stay home full- and then part-time with my first child.   

In other words- those ridiculous years I spent in higher education weren't only a means to an end, they were a ton of fun and added real value to my life, both while I was doing them as well as now that I'm through and back in the real world.

[sheepstache]

You know, as much as people like to tout the starting salary of stem degrees  no one is really acknowledging the deep dark secret.     The people that are generally paid the most in an organization are the sales people.    I'd venture to say the wealthiest people I've ever met had little if any formal education.    But they could all sell things and lead people.

I'd probably encourage a kid that wanted to make moeny to learn how to sell and lead before they learned engineering, math, history or english.   

Case in point, as a kid I knew a guy that was hanging sheet rock and ended up owning a head hunting firm.   I'd venture that his net worth was north of 20 million.     I also worked for a guy that owned  a golf course.    He started off as a lowly assistant pro and ended up owning all kinds of steel related business.   By the time I knew him he spent most of the day drinking Johnny Walker.

The whole stem vs humanities thing is a red herring if we're talking about earnings.    You make money when you can do something that no one else can.   Sure, designing a great product might fall into that category, but selling it is always more important.   

This a great point. A family member of mine does not have a college degree, and he spend his career selling sports equipment to sports facilities. He made over $300,000 a year. This is not unusual if you are a good salesman and schmoozer and get in with the right company.

This gets at what I'm trying to say about motivation and personality making the biggest difference in earning power no matter which field. People who make money a priority end up with more money.

There's an interesting book, The Millionaire in the Mirror, which, once you get past the cheesy title, is an interesting guide to this idea that you have to position yourself within an industry and business to be close to the money. People think that because some sector or field is hot, all they have to do is randomly dive in and then get sour if that doesn't work out.

He uses the example of a successful video game company. The sales force got taken to a "conference" once a year, with their families, in the Caribbean. The software engineers got taken out to lunch at the local hotel. Why was so much more made of the sales force rather than the software people who were actually creating the product the company was known for? It was because the sales force were the ones pulling in the money. Or consider an accountant in a candy company vs. an accountant in an accounting firm. You can't just pick a successful field and a successful company, you have to make sure that your job is vital to the company making money. Anyway, other interesting stuff in the book that might be interesting to young people.

[amyable]

BA in English and [gasp] Art History, M.A. in Secondary Education, M.A. in School Counseling
Months to first full time teaching job: 0
Months to first full time school counseling job: 0
Time spent unemployed: I was employed in my field before graduating each M.A.
Debt Accrued: 0 (All our student debt is from my husband's education.)

I don't make much money, but I live in a very, very low cost of living area.  Our state minimum teacher / counselor salaries have worked in my favor.  My job is extremely fulfilling and lacks some of the stresses of classroom teaching.

I also could not have retired early off of some STEM job, and then pursued the work I'm pursuing part-time or on a volunteer basis.  The student information I work with is too sensitive to share with volunteers.  And, the students I work with need the continuity of someone who is on campus full time.  I don't think I'll ever quit, unless I decide to go into administration (which would mean more money). 

I adore working in public education with all it's setbacks--I went into this with my eyes wide open.  And, I'm pretty insulted by some of the posters on this forum who seem to think all liberal arts majors were naive and mislead.  If someone gave me 1 million dollars tomorrow, I would not quit my job. 

[Noodle]

Undergrad degree in history. Subsequent to that an MBA that opened a lot of doors. But those four years studying/learning at a rigorous college where I got my butt kicked were great. The critical thinking, the debate, the research, the extensive writing...makes me tired (and very grateful!) just thinking about it. I use those skills every day on the job and wouldn't be nearly as effective without them. My field is business.

Another humanities major here (and working in my field). When these debates come up, there are always people who suggest getting the "money-earning" credential first, and then you can study the humanities on your own later. Like MarciaB above, based on my experience the humanities are very hard to study at a rigorous level outside the university setting, because you really need a teacher (and, if you're lucky) peers who will challenge your thinking and arguments and suggest new perspectives that you can't see on your own--getting really good at these fields has a lot to do with the ability to get outside your own head, which is tough in isolation. It's been very hard to convert the humanities to online instruction because it's difficult to provide for that interaction, at least in the MOOC setting.

I  think part of the disconnect is that at the high school and general public levels (and even the 101 level classes that non-majors tend to take for the degree requirements at college), learning these subjects is still largely about listening to (or reading about) an expert telling you about things. Only majors get to the more rigorous, interesting classes that require interactive learning. If you're only familiar with the "knowledge transmission" method, why would you argue for paying a lot of money to sit in a classroom when that expertise is available elsewhere, for free? I know in my subject, there is a movement to bring the argument-construction and evidence-gathering aspects of the work to much younger ages and I am all for it. That's the fun and valuable part!

I'm curious (since I never took higher-level STEM classes)...in STEM subjects, does the instruction also change to more interaction and problem-solving etc at the higher-level classes, or is it taught pretty much the same throughout?

[Metta]

I'm not sure I count since I straddle both worlds. My undergrad degrees were in English - Writing and Geographic Information Systems. My masters degrees were in Applied Language - Linguistics and a MSBA in Management Information Systems.

So am I a liberal arts person? Or a STEM person? Or a Business person? I can't dissect myself that finely. I am happy with all my degrees. The linguistics has probably helped me the most through my life in a variety of ways - both for what I learned and in getting me a variety of jobs. I suspect this is because linguistics itself straddles liberal arts and STEM. The MSBA resulted in a large raise. Hands down the most enjoyable series of classes I took was in how to read and speak Anglo-Saxon. I haven't had a use for it yet but I hope that changes someday.

Wes Hæl’!

[SporeSpawn]

The whole stem vs humanities thing is a red herring if we're talking about earnings.    You make money when you can do something that no one else can.   Sure, designing a great product might fall into that category, but selling it is always more important.   

Yep, this all over.

No statistic and no anecdote is ever going to be enough to justify a STEM major who goes into crippling debt and shoots himself in the head or an Arts Major who follows his dreams and ends up dying of cancer in a homeless shelter because he never made anything. People can say all they want about how it's about "doing what you love" vs. "doing what makes money" but at the end of the day, your ability to understand and succeed on YOUR path is what matters.

Career advice shouldn't be about getting you into "a career that fits you." It should be about helping you find what you can do (which accounts for both skill and desire) and making a plan to do it.

[lithy]

I read most replies in this thread but if I skipped some where similar thoughts were already stated, I apologize. 

My personal thoughts on the STEM vs Liberal Arts are twofold.

The reason (and GuitarStv touched on this) that STEM is highly promoted here is because the goal is to get in and get out as fast as possible.  A smash and grab style requires a known tool.  You don't show up to rob the jewelry store with a book on lock picking and set about learning to pick the lock.  You bring your hammer, get it done and leave.

Such is the similarity to early retirement and STEM fields.  It simplifies things.  Want to retire early?  You need to make money.  Want a (relatively) guaranteed way to start making good money?  Enter a STEM field.

For the STEM folks, the push back that you get from soft science or liberal arts majors has some merit.  Over a longer term, many people with arts degrees will find more lucrative employment than many lifetime desk engineers and often times they will honestly enjoy their work more than crunching numbers all day for a paycheck.  They will however spend several years early little money which is not conducive to retiring early.

Personally I have an Anthropology degree (listed #1 on Forbes least valuable degrees! woo!) and while early on in my post-college life I had doubts and regrets about not just putting my brain to better use with an engineering degree, I eventually found a career path that I truly enjoy, and while early retirement is still the goal and my pay is not incredible, if I have to do this for a few additional years than if I was an engineer I won't have a problem with that.  So when you ask me if I would do it over again?  I say yes, because I enjoy where I am today.  If I never found a path, then maybe I wouldn't have the same thoughts.  Sure, a mechanical engineering degree would be extremely helpful in a brewing career, but somehow I doubt I would found brewing as a career if I had done that first.

The biggest problem I see is the cost of the liberal arts degree.  Because colleges/universities have become the job market's development league, academia is now akin to job training.  This was never the historical purpose for a higher learning.  Academia should never purport to teach you to work.  Apprenticeships were for work, scholarship was for becoming a worldly person.  There is a value in liberal arts degrees, but it is mostly personal not financial.  As applied to the current job market, the value just isn't there, but as long as we (via social and government pressure) sponsor post-secondary education as a means to get a leg up while 'blue collar' work is shunned, costs will continue to go up, and 18 year olds who have not been prepared for life beyond school will continue to choose majors like Film Studies, English Lit, and even...Anthropology!

[RootofGood]

I hold a Bachelor of Arts in Spanish Language and Literature.  I still managed to retire by 33.  The BS in Civil Engineering probably helped.  ;)

I think the BA added plenty of breadth to life whereas the BS added plenty of bread. 

While working in the engineering field, I was the go to guy when somebody needed "purty writin' ".  I don't know how many times the president of the consulting firm where I use to work came to me with a pile of stinking BS, some drawings and some notes, and said "Here, you're good at writing.  Write this all up and make it sound like you would be an idiot if you didn't agree with our position on this."  The humanities courses probably helped.

[Breadwinner]

My major was Anthropology and minor was Spanish language and literature. I graduated college at 20 years old with 18k in loans. Also met my partner, an Art student, while in college.

A decade later, I am the primary breadwinner in our household, making over 50k (will hit 60k after my next set of work related exams). That is well above the median household income in my area. I usually feel good about my income until I am treated with contempt by someone judging me for my choice of major...I was a teenager when I studied Anthropology, but people still give me the "what did you plan to do with that?" Comment as though I must be a delusional idiot.

For my part, I know my studies had a major impact in how a see the world, and I can't imagine thinking any other way. It is just too bad that the intellectual development aspect of college is downplayed and the ROI his now king. Honestly, if the goal is to reach FI as soon as possible, without regard to structured learning, college is not necessary at all.

[clarkfan1979]

One of my friends intended to major in computer science, but thought he knew more than the prof's because of technology advancing so quickly. He switched his major to history because he wanted to learn about something that he didn't know. He does fine. I have a lot of respect for him and his decision.