I think their point is that certain careers are sufficiently important to society and the risks of failure so high that not enough people go into them, so it's a benefit to society to reduce the risk. More teachers, more doctors, more defense attorneys who can afford to work with the downtrodden.
That's my point. You want to talk about personal "bad decisions", but what's a "good decision" and why, given that all of the lucrative careers require a series of risks in order to enter the field and become successful in it?
> we as society can avoid putting up additional hazards
Agreed, but I wasn't arguing against that, just against the criticism of individuals for having personal ambition and taking risks.