On the other hand, here is someone who has completed a degree and gone beyond. Clearly they have the ability to learn new material. Furthermore, they attained a proficiency at least that of the self taught - no degree segment mentioned above.
Now, given a "you can make $150k/year as a software developer" vs "you can make $100k/year as a ME" there's something to be considered. Additionally, if thats instead a "you can make $70k/year as a junior engineer getting the necessary time to become a licensed engineer for the next few years" ... well, there are student loans to be paid off.
There is a problem on the hiring end of the software market though where I get flooded with resumes from engineers and data scientists and interviewing them for a software job seems to be a complete crapshoot. Literally the best and worst candidates that we get through. We get some folks with serious traditional engineering chops who can't code (as in solve a problem with software) their way out of a paper bag.
The self-taught developer and CS grad pools seem to be far more consistent, in my experience. I get through less of the very worst people and those are easier to filter in this pool.
If the self-taught/bootcamp junior programmer can nail it while you can't and are asking for twice+ as much money, how do I justify hiring you?
If argument is that they need to pay loans, then computer degrees should also be allowed to learn on the job and do mechanical/civil stuff ?