If you want to go to a very competitive school like MIT, probably. Generally the "best" schools are those that have better access to good professors, and resources that the brightest can best take advantage of. Now you can be bright and not want to make a lot of money out of MIT, but generally the assumption is that in capitalism if it is valuable it is worth money, and if you go into a job that pays a lot you are doing a more valuable job than if you were doing something that paid less.

If you want to go into a less competitive career, going into a less competitive school can make a lot sense, often because the less competitive schools can have better programs appealing to less lucrative fields because the pressure is less severe than it is for an MIT undergrad.

That rules out the careers of two friends from school, who both studied at Cambridge (UK). One runs an educational charity programme in Congo, the other does cancer research.

Another top-school engineering graduate I know spent 5 years building water facilities (pumps, wells etc) in Africa.

> What if they decided they would rather be a teacher? A musician and band director?

There are literally government-subsidized student loan forgiveness programs for exactly this purpose.

> A serial backpacker?

Most student loans are backed by the government. As a tax payer I have no interest in subsidizing someone's backpacking trip. You can't be a serial backpacker if you have a car payment, rent, or a mortgage either.

> What if they are injured and can no longer take the 40, 50, 60 hours in a chair at the office it would require to maintain the level of salary?

A. Disability insurance exists for exactly this reason

B. You can make the same argument against getting a mortgage. FUD.