It varies WIDELY with the program. Not all of these are rip offs. Not all of the students get the same or need the same things as you. There are all kinds of different ways that people learn. There are also lots of different levels that people are coming into things on.
You are completely missing the point. You can't just say "So what if a mechanic forgets to check the brakes to make sure they work before setting a customer loose in a car that is going to run off a cliff and DIE."
Insurance can certainly cover the cost, but is it your company's official stance that it produces coders who need to be paired with supplemental errors and omissions insurance policies because they will crash your company's product or that it would be ok if they cause major problems?
I think you are somehow confusing graphic design with software engineering and programming here. Maybe what you should be telling people is that you are teaching people how to build brochure websites for a living. If that is it then your perceived quality or capability bar might not be objectionable.
A lot of big companies like MS hire boy scouts (or girl scouts) who feel that they need a certification to carry around a pocket knife at camp for their entry level jobs. They also hire really smart people too, but they tend to hire the B's, not the A's. Sometimes it isn't clear whether they can tell or not. They like people who can be molded ushered in a direction over time. What you are describing isn't isolated is all I am saying. For better or worse, these are hires that they can shape into sequoias in their forrest of talent.
Go read the literature on Hack Reactor. They double load their students with learning to code (better (assumed they are not 100% green)) and with how to perform in the job. They also help with interviewing 101 in an applied sense. Imagine getting a job based on knowing how to code, but without knowing how to pass normalized interviews that many teams simply assume people have insights and experience around.
I am not affiliated with HR and have not met them, but I like their approach on paper and could see it making a big difference. I have met people who have graduated from different programs. Some are ready, but that is largely a product of the person...not the program. I do not feel as confident about all programs generally.
I think what you are thinking is that people get knowledge, but not capability but things do not have to happen that way.
Coding and Computer Science can be mutually exclusive. There is no requirement or reason why you should be required to take computer science to be a programmer. There are plenty of coding jobs out there that do not require (in principle or practice) a CS degree.
On top of that, having a CS degree is no guarantee of someone being even a decent coder. There are tons of crappy CS grads who are bested by people with no degree, associates degrees, and random liberal arts degrees (e.g. philosophy, english).
You are right about the cost of boot camps. However, the exact same argument could be made against traditional 4 year college programs and masters degrees.
Ultimately, what you learn in the class is quickly eclipsed by what you learn on the job and in through continuous self study and pursuit of knowledge.
They might want to consider that there are a lot of people out there who could change their life by getting some additional skills. Why do you assume that everyone is not capable just because they did not major in CS in college? Whether it is monetarily or otherwise, there are a lot of reasons. There is nothing wrong with dangling a bump in pay as the potential outcome of gaining new skills. Your nurse analogy might as well be that of training to be a doctor instead of being a programmer or nurse.
I should back up and qualify my thoughts on this a bit more. I do not support some blanket idea that "trade schools" are a good idea or that they can help. I do support the idea that good skills education can help. I also support the idea that certain "trade schools" are better than others. The same is true of classes whether they are brick and mortar classes or MOOCs.
People do have to start somewhere. He is right about the copy and paste stuff, but there is a principle he is getting at not a prohibition. Everyone looks for answers online, but not everyone has the same capabilities and mental horsepower.
It is great that there are so many options for people to learn to code, whether it is for web development or for software engineering which is the real fault line.
It isn't like this is an article from a developer or hiring manager. It is just a paid blogger who is trying to net students via web searches. But more to your concerns, it isn't like this article promises six figures after taking a course. IF someone wants a job as a developer, there are jobs doing web content management and things like .PSD implementation as well as brochure website freelancing projects. Assuming someone wanted to learn, they have to start somewhere. No everyone is applying for your company's programmer job.
To your point about just being realistic:
There are a lot of jobs that require some coding experience, but that are not full time programmer jobs. A marketing person might use some HTML and some JavaScript or even a little PHP. A designer will ultimately need to learn some JavaScript if they want to advance, especially if they want to do freelance projects on their own.
Hell, there are investment bankers and financial industry people as well as political campaign staff who do some coding because it is an implied part of the job or just because it makes the job easier. You never know.