I think it's a quite good argument, and at very least one that doesn't rely on colleges literally producing a larger number Stephen Kings, as if something about the quantity produced could matter at all (really curious how you even arrived at that counter).

It’s not a good argument. Zero good writers learned it in college.

If one did, do you realize your argument fails?

http://airshipdaily.com/blog/05232014-authors-teachers

No. All learned to write by sitting down by themselves and writing.

Regardless, creative writing is but a subset of the discipline of English, if not an entirely separate department in a lot of schools. Most of it is studying what has already been written, making connections and forming articulations that understand our human world.

If you see the study of any humanities at all as only possibly measured by what success you gain in the domains of social status or notoriety, then I wonder if you apply that same rubric to STEM fields? Please be mindful that just because you dont know about something, doesn't make it dumb, bad, or pointless. At the very least, don't wave away so simply an entire discipline!

Future authors don't need a college program to "...study what has already been written, making connections and forming articulations that understand our human world".

They can do this by reading books. There are even books of criticism that help you learn about other books.

If you're comprehension of my reply is any indication, you could of probably used more English classes.

Or could indicate you need to work on your communication skills...