The difference between a technician and an engineer is not a college degree; it is the nature of the job description, the importance and centrality of the role, and level of responsibility. Many engineers working for Google, for example, do not have college degrees and are self-taught. To point this out is not to denigrate education, nor ignore your other points-- just one of the premises.
This is true in some organizations, but in other places the difference between "technician" and "engineer" literally is an engineering degree. I currently work at such an organization: you can't have the title "engineer" unless you have an engineering degree, technicians cannot rise above a certain level in the organization (which effectively puts a ceiling on their pay, as well), and technicians cannot be placed in positions of authority over engineers. A lot of this is stupid and makes no sense: I know "technicians" who are doing the same work as "engineers," better than many of the engineers they work with, but they are paid less and work under less experienced team leads, all because they lack a degree. Unfortunately, I'm sure there are plenty of other places that do things the same way.
Thinking about some of the people I've known who have worked in these roles, I wonder if the dichotomy between engineer and technician can be better described as theoretical vs. practical and design vs. maintenance.
Also, some engineers only have 2 year degrees, the same as many technicians. But the content of the education is different: very broadly speaking, breaking along theoretical vs. practical lines, with some crossover.
