<p>^ Quod erat faciendum!</p>
<p>The question was mostly rhetorical, and meant for others to understand that the presence or absence of certain classes of employers is not a proxy for the quality of schools. A number of employers look at their next hires at colleges where they stand a better chance to land numerous students to fill their lower paying positions. As an example, a large defense contractor in Fort Worth might spend more time recruiting at UTEP than a UT-Austin. </p>
<p>The same applies to employers that look to replace their quickly vanishing classes of recruits for the lower positions in tax, accounting, and audit. </p>
<p>You cannot blame them as it makes perfect sense for a bridesmaid to be a bride by casting a wider and less selective net. </p>
<p>On the other hand, with the last five years of economic shambles for graduating students, the graduates of the most selective schools might become a bit more enamored with those “low” entry jobs, as they offer better options than serving hot cocaa with a green apron to those same guys who did “settle” for a fluff business degree at one of the academic factories. </p>
<p>All in all, the question about spending $100,000 one does not have yields the same answer. And that is to grab that degree at the most affordable net cost.</p>