This create market driven dynamics in which degrees basically are tailor made for industry. This approach disincentivizes pure research for scientific purposes.
In any case, if there is a specific need for specific research, I'm sure the gov can figure out a way to incentivize particular useful tracks which the market ignores. Grants programs, etc.
Companies value people who can apply the scientific method (experimental design, data gathering, data analysis, etc). They hire people who have acquired this specific knowledge often through grants. Whether these subsidies lead to application of the specific knowledge gained through the grant underwriting process is debatable. Companies will hire people who studied something that requires the scientific method for which there is maybe no market, and make them apply that approach to things for which there is a market.
A future where universities looked more like community colleges situated next to research institutes, rather than weirdly blending the two, could be neat.
Have people really interested in teaching rather than research teach the 100/200-level courses. The scientists next door can teach seniors and juniors, and show up for guest lectures.
> This create market driven dynamics in which degrees basically are tailor made for industry. This approach disincentivizes pure research for scientific purposes.
Good, there is nothing wrong with all that. Degrees should exist so people find jobs in the real world. Research can be funded by the government itself. Absolutely no need for government backed student loans in either cases. People who want to go to private universities can get a regular bank loan, that's how it works in the rest of the world. The US system is unique and predatory.
Pure research for scientific purposes is done by Ph.D. students and is already funded by research grants. Student loans are not part of the equation here.
