Offering debt as a way to finance regular life activities like school and housing is also a good way to paper over the other, equally serious problems we currently have in the US, an explosion in the cost of school and housing, compared to what people earn.
If people didn't have debt as a way to access these things, there might be more energy for addressing the income inequality and lack of class mobility we have, that's being obscured by the access to debt.
Neither side is necessarily wrong here but we changed the law to address the problems you describe.
I see this as similar to the payday lending debate. Payday lenders aren’t creating demand, they are responding to it. What happens when we eradicate that form of lending? Most things start from good intentions.
If people didn't have debt as a way to access these things, there might be more energy for addressing the income inequality and lack of class mobility we have, that's being obscured by the access to debt.