Specific examples? No, I'm not in the habit of inquiring after my acquaintances' finances.
But here's a thought-experiment: Suppose you take out loans to pursue a field that experiences a turndown or bubble burst — such that before you pay off your loans, there are substantially fewer jobs available in the field than qualified entrants.
It is easy to declare that anyone who can't find a job is thereby shown to be stupid and lazy. However, this ultimately forms a goalpost-moving or "No True Scotsman" argument; the weirdness of which is shown by the fact that it sets different standards for "stupid and lazy" in different fields, depending on a fact not under the control of the supposedly stupid-and-lazy person — namely the number of available jobs in that field.
Since this fall I will be applying to college in the USA, I have compiled a hefty list of colleges based on the following criteria:
-4-year school;
-co-ed or all men;
-Biology major;
-"full-ride" financial aid available.
The problem's that I have quite a lot of choices, hundreds, as a matter of fact. So how should I narrow down my list even further, given that I don't care about other stuff, such as campus size or location?
Moreover, to how many colleges should I apply? As far as I know, mpst people apply to 6-9 colleges, but some even apply to 20! I guess that by applying to as many colleges possible, my chances of admission go up. But, I probably won't have time to write hundreds of admission essays, or the money to send in my application to all these colleges.
Lastly, as my objective is to gain admission somewhere, should I only apply to colleges with acceptance rates above a certain percentage? What should that percentage be?
If anyone would like to take this in private, I'd be more than happy to receive some advice from any member of the community!