The purpose of education is to first understand what the rich need and what they currently lack. Then, you use education to transform yourself into someone who possesses the skills they require. Therefore, not all education can elevate your economic status; only certain "services needed by the rich" require education to be provided.
For example, the rich still get sick, and they still need doctors. Education can indeed make you a doctor, giving you the potential to be needed and become one of their transaction partners. However, this is only a prerequisite. If, after becoming a doctor, you nobly go to some impoverished mountainous area to provide free medical care to the local poor, although this is kind, it will clearly not make you rich. You can only become wealthy by providing medical services to the rich. But the rich don't need philosophers, writers, or historians. So no matter how much you learn in these fields, it won't bring much economic benefit, simply because the rich don't need you.
Therefore, even if you possess the same knowledge, different societies will yield different outcomes. For instance, Song Yingxing in ancient China was at least a qualified scientist, but his greatest achievement was only the book "Tiangong Kaiwu." His main value lies in proving that there were indeed quite good scientists in China. However, he merely existed and did not have a significant impact like Newton. This is because in the social and cultural context he lived in, the rich never needed scientists. No matter how talented he was, he wouldn't receive investment or patronage in science. Therefore, his talent and passion, apart from proving his existence, brought him no benefit.
On the other hand, you might possess mediocre skills, but if you can please a certain rich person, you can gain wealth. What kind of person was Gao Qiu in Water Margin? A scientist? Economist? Doctor? Merchant? None of the above. He was a football player who happened to meet an emperor who liked football, and thus became rich. Who were Zhou Xing and Lai Junchen in the Tang Dynasty? They were sadistic torturers, but Empress Wu just happened to need two sadistic torturers, so they also became rich.
So, between Song Yingxing and Gao Qiu, whose knowledge contributed more to human civilization? Definitely Song Yingxing. Who was richer? Definitely Gao Qiu. That's how wealth works. While individuals themselves play a part in determining who is richer, if Song Yingxing had played football, he would have just been another Gao Qiu, not the scientist we know. Therefore, if you want money, the first thing is to see what kind of rich people you have the opportunity to interact with, and the second is to become the kind of person they need.
This means that the behavior and interests of the rich in a society, that is, the cultural beliefs of that society, determine whose social class will rise and who will become wealthy. If the rich in a society are all obsessed with religion, then the wealthy will be monks, theologians, and charlatans. If the rich in a society pursue pleasure, then the wealthy will be actors, courtesans, and luxury goods manufacturers. If the rich in a society pursue hunting and war, then the wealthy will be brave soldiers, warriors, and adventurers. If the rich in a society pursue knowledge, then the wealthy will be those who gather and research knowledge. During the Renaissance, the Italian rich in Florence loved art and craftsmanship, so a group of skilled artisans and artists gained wealth in that era.
Therefore, the question is, what kind of society are you in, and do you want to cater to the rich in that society? Of course, whether you have the ability to do so is also a question. For example, there are a bunch of guys in Taiwan with a lot of money who clearly like child exploitation. How much money do those who provide this kind of service have? Does providing this service require you to have a doctorate, understand calculus, be brave, or be beautiful? None of these are needed. That's why drugs and child exploitation, despite being severely punished, continue to be rampant crimes, simply because the buyers are really rich. The more corrupt and indulgent the upper class of a society is, the more their wealth will breed crime, because what they need are criminals, and they will enable these criminals to climb the social ladder.
The idea that "within books are houses of gold" exists in China because the imperial examination system provided scholars with a path to obtain corrupt power. In the end, it didn't stimulate all knowledge and learning, but only created people who read a bunch of books to gain power. To put it bluntly, it wasn't so much that studying made people rich in China, but rather that entering politics made people rich, and studying was just a ticket to enter politics. Reading books unrelated to politics, or studying without entering politics, wouldn't lead to wealth.
Today, the imperial examination system is gone, but there are medical licenses, TSMC, and civil service exams. So you can still use education to gain a certain opportunity to get close to the rich, just in a different form. And the books you read that are unrelated to these have nothing to do with money. For example, if you study something like forest management, it's not that it's useless, but there don't seem to be any rich people here who want to pay you to manage a forest...
