Wealth: “it has nothing to do with the importance of their work or their success.” Well that is sort of false. Society sets a value on goods and services based on supply and demand: if your skill-set is rare and in high demand, you will make lots of money.
There is a high demand for healthcare, so why don’t nurses get paid more? It is important work, but there are lots of people who want to be nurses so that pushes the price down.
Same with School Teachers: its a clean, safe, high-status job working with kids, so lots of women want to be teachers.
Men tend to under-value cleanliness and safety and instead go for jobs that pay well: often dirty, dangerous, hard work pays better than “Scientists, scholars, writers, or educators,” even without the PhD and the $200K student debt.
If you choose to spend $200K on an education that won’t pay that investment back because you want to do something you think has social value, then that’s your choice: it’s a free world. Just don’t whine about the fact that it is hard to pay the loan back or put your hand in my pocket looking for a handout.
Do your research, and then choose the career you want with your eyes open: if you want to get paid very little to work for the needy, arguably you don’t need a PhD for that.
It is a good thing that Society rewards occupations that are needed, and discourages those that are not: otherwise there would be even more Students studying fluff degrees in “Social Science” or other Oxymoron subjects, then complaining that graduates are not paid well. That argument is based on Left-Wing Entitlement, Ignorance of Economics, and Envy of the better-paid. Socialism, in a word. I suggest that the ignorance in this viewpoint is all on the other side.