Because a humanities degree is almost worthless in the market, humanities students probably subsidized *your* degree, which (I assume) was worth more in the economy. Honestly, I think this system of everyone paying the same tuition is going to collapse eventually. Different degrees aren't worth the same, and it seems like students are finally starting to catch on to the fact that worthless degrees don't let you pay off the student debts that they cost. We'll see.

But we're arguing over whether extra services provided by the school should be paid for by tuition increases or not. Certainly, there is a line somewhere in the gray haze there. For example, should a student's tuition be used to pay for janitorial services if the student never uses the campus facilities? Well, there's a pretty strong case on that one. What about the bowling center in the Wilk? Certainly not, right? So where's the line? Seems like a service that (nearly) all use can be justified in using tuition money for. Those that only a subset of the students want should be voluntary. IMO, sports fall in the latter category.