The argument is based on and lost with brief paragraph:
1) The power of universities comes from their monopoly of credentials. DOUBLE FALSE; power comes from the ability to indoctrinate next generation, usually along conservative lines; and, universities do not hold monopoly of any sort.

2) As Richard Vedder so deeply understands in his “Going Broke by Degree,” they are the only institutions allowed to separate young individuals by IQ and by the ability to complete complex tasks. ONLY? ALLOWED? Federal government does so extensively through various testing schemes for the military, foreign service, etc. Plus, such activities are regulated by supra-organizations, above universities themselves.

3) They do not add value to that, except in technical fields. ALL FIELDS are technical; thus, value added to all fields.

4) Recruiters do not pay premiums because of what the Ivy League or the flagship state universities teach in English, history, political science, or sociology. FALSE. The heart of English is writing and critical methods–both technical fields. The heart of history is
historiography. The heart of political science is statistics. The same for sociology.

5) They hire there despite, not because of, that. ???? Nonsensical.

6) Recruiters do not pay premiums because our children have been sent to multicultural centers for sensitivity training. FALSE. Recruiters regularly report that above all they need graduates sensitive to multicultural environment, knowledgeable of domestic and international
affairs, have the ability to think critically, and can write competently. Take these vs. teaching someone how to compute engineering principles or administer an injection–which are easier to learn, perform, teach?

7) Recruiters pay premiums for the value already there, which universities merely identify. FALSE. Illogical. We may help identify existing value, but we also help cultivate what is there and what can become.