Ok, there are some interesting statements here that I would like to challenge. First there is this one:

> If you consider me - with parents who were willing to
> pay for everything - vs students who are much more apt
> candidate but are unable to find the funding or get
> the loan.

This implies there are students "much more apt candidate" who are unable to get funded. But really there are two things here, one is getting into a college and the other is paying for it. In the US there are a lot of colleges, and in my personal experience I got into MIT but there was no financial aid available, and I also got into USC and they offered me a full scholarship. So I went to USC rather than MIT (my first choice). Four years of "in state" tuition, (tuition at a state school where you already live) is generally less than $30,000 which is the cost of a nice car. Graduate school it gets even better since you can often trade tuition for teaching the undergrads or a lab or two.

Combining that knowledge with the experience of working with people from a wide variety of collegiate backgrounds and you will find that good people are good people, regardless of the status of the school they attended. What is more, smaller colleges tend to recruit people with similar values so when you find someone from a college who fits well with your company, chances are other people from that college will as well.

> Do you think society should run like that ?

And yes, it works as expected. Your statements seem to indicate that if you didn't go to a "good" school you can't get a "good" job, but in the STEM field that really isn't the case. And after you've worked for 3 years folks have a record of what you've done to start referring too and the pedigree of your school becomes less and less important as a discriminator. And if you go to graduate school (which can be cost neutral) you may find you "upgrade" your school pedigree.

So this seems to be your key pain point --

> Do we want young people to waste their life's
> surplus produce paying back their debt ?

And it's a fallacy. We don't want students to feel like they have to go to a "top" school to succeed, because they don't. As a student you have a choice of schools from the very expensive to the very modestly priced. That is a healthy market. And there will always be people who will try to make a status symbol out of where they live or where they went to school Etc. But as you get older you will see that those "values" are entirely artificial. Five years from now you will look back and say, "Gee, I really could have gone to any school and arrived at this same point in my career."

The cost of an undergraduate engineering degree in the US spans the range of $12,000 - $300,000. Everyone who graduates gets to be an engineer, depending on the size and influence of their school they may know people already in their chosen field. But I cannot find any examples of someone who was "held back" from their potential by graduating at a less well known school.

I'm really sorry you got so little value out of the money your parents spent on your education. And I know how "real" your personal experience is relative to your world outlook. However, there are other experiences out there which are very very different than yours and they are very common. You will meet these people in the places you work, and the communities you visit. I'm hoping you will find it isn't as bad as you might think.