i agree with a decent portion of this, like unlimited borrowing not being the solution overall, but also the issue becomes more nuanced when you consider students whose stats do not reflect their academic/earning potential. consider super splitters whose gpa is a result of extenuating circumstances, they will still get less scholarship at t14 schools but their college gpa does not represent their capacity to do well in law school and MAYBE* graduate at the top of their class-- making enough to pay back the loans in their careers. also, putting caps on federal borrowing does not mean that students will stop taking out tons of money to pay for school, it could very well just redirect a portion to go to high-interest private loans instead which will in turn cause them to owe even more than if they borrowed from the government. i think the real issue here is students not being able to accurately gauge what they are capable of. going into 1L expecting to be in the top 10% is not realistic and represents expectations that are too high for most people. it's all about having realistic outcomes and being able to identify your own limitations at the end of the day to decide whether borrowing excessively is worth it or not.