Beak,
First off I actually agree with you that these type schemes are ruinous to the career over all. I agree that it effects me in that it's a career I have pumped a lot of cash into in order to join and I want - nay NEED - reasonable conditions to be available to me if I make it there.
However. Do you know any single one of the 20 OAA cadets? I'd bet good money almost certainly not. Therefore how do you know ANY of them are using mummy and daddys money, let alone all of them, as opposed to their own. Or is it that you find it impossible to conceive that they may have made the money themselves. Like you have. Or I have.
Oh, that's right, you don't know if they're using anyone elses money or not. You're assuming. What is it they say about assumption? It's the mother of all.....good decisions? no, that's not it....the mother of all correct inferences perhaps..no, no.....
In any case, why is using the fortune of relatives or friends completely out of order to you, yet being given a job at "your mates investment company" - without undergoing proper selection, presumably, is perfectly acceptable? Alright that last one would never stand up in a court of law as it's conjecture and hearsay, but it pretty much fits with what you display. Do you really not get it? You didn't get your high paying job on merit, you got it through friends and relatives...not SO very different from borrowing from "mummy and daddy" now, is it. Of course I await the obligatory outraged response, where you'll probably insult me and say that you definitely, absolutely got your job on your own merits and it's nothing to do with being done a favour by someone you knew. Of course it is.
The fact is that neither you or I have any right to determine how, when or where someone should spend the finances available to them. Personally I did not - and do not - think this is the "right" opportunity, but that's by the by. It's not MY money those candidates are spending.
Your entire spiteful, vitriolic problem with the OAA guys/gals seems to stem from the fact that "they weren't selected". But they were. You've been told the minimum selection criteria by someone that KNOWS what it was. You've been told by an easy TC that the interviews were conducted as normal and the standard was high. You seem to gloss over that. Yet, you [say you] have no problem with the CTC cadets getting marginally less shafted....a very curious stance....both are paying to fly, both are "destroying industry Ts and Cs" - one could even argue that the CTC guys/gals were LESS selected, as THEIR selection was before their training and therefore is less current to their skills. Hence your argument seems to fall down repeatedly and seems to be nothing more than an attack on OAA itself, which is why you keep being accused of being bitter and perhaps failing an OAA assessment.
There's an old saying I once got told - like most such old proverbs it's trite, but a lot of truth within. "If one man tells you you're ill and you feel fine, ignore them. If ten men tell you you're ill, lie down".
Beak - go have a nice lie down. There's a good chap.