I was never trying to advocate to go and buy a TR and then try get a job with it. I think it's foolish and I would never advocate it.
By saying "paying for your type rating one way or another", I was referring to how a lot of airlines make you pay for it by either paying you less the first couple of years or using a third party provider (e.g. Wings at CTC) and making you pay part of the training up front. There's not many jet jobs out there offered with no financial strings attached. Again, I did not mean "go pay for a TR and hope for the best".
And I certainly agree that starting your career with instructing and turbo-props is a lot more fun and probably makes you a better pilot. I was lucky to have my flight school finding me a jet job, but in a way I would have preferred starting my career flying for something like Logan or Eastern. I was 35 and my wife's biological clock was ticking loudly, so the jet job and salary were too good to turn down.
My point was... Do not kid yourself in thinking you're avoiding being exploited by going the instructor/turbo-prop way. Just take an Excel spreadsheet and compare your earnings (and expeneses e.g. instructor rating) for the first four years for both career paths. You'll see that you're financially much better off having gone straight to a jet job even if your initial salary was reduced (we're not talking Ryanair here, just look at the likes of Flybe and initial FO salaries if not type rated).
So, one last time... Going the instructor/turboprop route is probably the best way to go in terms of flying skills. But DO NOT think it will also cost you less than signing a jet contract that involves financial sacrifice (what a lot of people call "selling out"). But if you're young and single, go have fun before sitting in the cruise for hours talking about your pension :-)
P