I was neither a nepo baby or aspiring monk. What I was, was a kid from a non academic family who wanted more than my small town education could provide. I wanted to push myself to learn at a deeper level and prove it by becoming one of a different crowd of technologists. Maybe these are misguided motivations but they were undeniable and not at all about asceticism or idle riches. It was absolutely worth it.
To me it's a question of how much cost a person should reasonably incur in order to pursue one's interests, and I think the amount of people with absurd student loan debt and time spent, compared to their earning potential, is at meme status for millennials and zoomers.
To be clear, I do think the motivations aren't inherently misguided, but they could be, and my guess is that people are taking their potential outcomes more seriously.
She wouldn't have been able to either, it was just plausible, though still probably pretty expensive for her at a different time, likely with another income.
It's not impossible to make some pursuits work, but tbh some things are not worth pursuing if they ain't gunna pay. It's an existential crisis that people are well-aware of; why invest ones finite resources into something that won't even let you form a stable adulthood?
For me, my employability vastly improved when I graduated, and subsequently worked where I did (which was only unlocked because of my grad work).
Also I just love computer science. It's magic.
The “prove you’re special” motivation is definitely a strong third reason that does not align with the nepotism baby or monk archetypes
And so it must be that people who choose to get a PhD come from means.