Well all of these individual views on how English/Classics/Sociology/Politics etc are 'rated' just vary from person to person, the fact that all of them have in common is that a degree in them is usually one for 'signalling' value only, rather than for teaching content which is pre-requisite knowledge for a job (as would be the case for an engineering job where they want engineering grads for instance). 'Signalling' in this context means the employer has an initial filter where it wants to consider only those who have 'signalled' a certain amount of intellectual ability which is why the vast majority of graduate schemes say they want a 2:1 from any discipline to get through the next filter.
But in terms of employment, if you've done a 'signalling' degree then once you're past the initial filter, personal competencies and relevant experience or extra curriculars become the be all and end all, the exact degree subject becomes an irrelevance. You are not going to get an employer looking at two candidates and saying "hmm this person A is slightly ahead on competencies than person B, but person A did English and person B did History, and I reckon History is better respected than English, so lets hire person B".
Even when it comes to fields like strat consulting or IB where they are looking for 'signalling' on having been to a 'target institution', they are not going to stress too much about whether someone has done PPE or Classics at Oxford in to the decision.
When people slag off Sociology and say it's a ticket to the dole, it's more a reflection on the stereotype of the sociology student who chose it because they didn't know what to do, meandered along university, got a 2:2, did no ECs and then say ohh noo how do I get a job. I bet if somebody chooses Sociology because they want to do it, works hard and gets a 1st, then picks up some ECs relevant to the field they want to go in, they will have no problem landing a good job.