Rubio is right that we need more welders than philosophers, and right that devaluing vocational education is a problem for America. It is a pity that he tried to make his point by using a false claim. Those with undergrad degrees in philosophy doubtless on average make less money than welders. Actual philosophers — the folks who make it through a Ph.D. and continue to do philosophy as university professors or ethics advisors to corporations or professional societies — however, make more money than welders.
I have long advocated America having polytechnic institutes — sort of trade schools plus, where one would learn a trade, for instance, welding along with the science behind it something about businesses where the skill you learn is used and a thin overlay of other courses that would suit one better to be a citizen in a democratic republic, rather than someone who just knows things related to one’s trade. The great lot of students who come to university not to be educated, but to “get a job” at the other end would be better served by polytechnics.
. . . but not as much as, say, NFL football players, since we are making ridiculous comparisons.
Concurring bump. The article and your response all resonate with a critique Rush Limbaugh once offered, in which he dissected the continuing strong bias toward hiring only the top graduates of elite universities at many businesses, and law and medical practices in particular: They would insist on having the top graduate from Harvard Law, or nobody, and the spread on beginning salary offers reflected that bias. Rush epitomized his critique as "What ever happened to 'Pretty Damn Good'?" This article is another critique of American business's continuing fascination with certain skills and callings, and with credentialism in those vocations.
Business acumen is native and depends on a different sort of learning and intelligence than one sees in graduate schools; we used to call it cunning. But there is no credential for the sort of acumen that made Bill Gates the owner of DOS.