I wish this trope would go somewhere to die. First, university level education is catering to a variety of outcomes. Some people in your class have gone on to use differential equations. If not explicitly, at least in understanding how capacitors and inductors introduce periodicity to the circuit. More importantly, the people that are doing research and advancing new technology do have to use these tools. In my view, at the university level, we want to optimize the absolute ceiling of potential for a thin sliver of the population. That's how we get scientific progress. Imagine if Einstein did not have access to higher level math because it was deemed mostly not useful. The collateral damage here is that some people need to take courses to justify the professor's course.

While I do agree that well-rounded individuals are more important you are missing the fact that the takeaway of STEM courses is not "to memorize Boyle's law". If that is how you approached your studies, then I can understand how you feel the education was a waste. But the more important aspect is learning the process in which one solves a problem. Being exposed to a variety of domains exposes you to slightly different initial conditions and thus shows you a broader range of problem solving methods. Likewise, I can generate an equally silly list like yours of life lessons learned in STEM class from my own public education that are more important than the material: build a Rube-Goldberg machine with a friend, start a study group with friends, figure out how to build a rocket, sell cookies (ok not from a STEM class), build a video game with friends, find out what you like to do.

Respectfully, I couldn't disagree more. Understanding the basics of calculus allows one to grok the underlying principles of the universe.

I studied hard science (geology) which included quite a bit of chemistry and physics, which helped me when buying a house (in a location not prone to natural disasters) and remodeling my house (understanding the physics in load-bearing walls and behavior of water in structures).

I also majored in English literature, studying overseas, which trained me to become a much better writer than I otherwise would have been.

Saying "just Google it" shows a very shallow understanding of applied theory which makes one a much better problem-solver, imo.

That's not the point. The point is to be able to retain that memory so you can form a unified view of the world and not have to resort to Google all the time. Did you think encyclopedias, dictionaries, and world maps didn't exist before Google?

> I still haven't been asked to solve a differential equation at work.

The skills you used in figuring out which method to apply and the accuracy in not making mistakes during integration, etc. will help you every day.

> Build a raseberry pi robot with a friend, start a club with friends, figure out how to build a fort in a tree, sell lemonade, build a website with friends, find out what you like to do <- I feel like these will be more important job skills compared to memorizing Boyle's law [1662].

...and, it is this sort of reductive thinking that's causing the US to fall behind in STEM. I will leave it to the reader to figure out how Boyle's Law literally applies to rocket science.

> You will have decades of sitting, staring at broken SPA apps - smelling someone cook fish in a microwave. You will never get that 3rd grade summer back.

Again, a false dichotomy. You can have plenty of fun in 3rd grade summer without needing every second of it needing to be some kind of Elysian playground.

That skill you can later use to do any of the mentioned activities far more efficiently.

At least that is how is see. I thought myself to be a test ninja during high school and I still follow the same basic pattern when doing work related stuff or for hobbies.