Then that is your opinion, and clearly nothing must get in the way of that.
If you are "modular" you won't get a look in with most airline companies without 1500-2000 hours including 500 hours turbine time. I am not sure how easy that will be, or how much it might cost you, or how long it will take, but if it is cheaper, then yes go for it.
I am not sure that you really understand how the cadet system works, as your questions don't make a lot of sense? The holding pool is the training schools not the airline customers. The loan is the students and not the airline companies. If the employment terminates, the company makes no further payments in respect of the loan, as that is a condition of employment (obviously).
I can't really pick through the rest of the rant, but on the point about passing the same tests. Yes they do, but the structure of the course is also geared towards early airline entry. The teaching methodology, the operations facilities, the syllabus and the flight training is nearly all done in an airline format. It has to be in order to facilitate a successful transistion at this level of experience. The customer airlines usually have an input in the syllabus and monitor the training. Obviously there is a seamless progression when one training school provides this. Contrast this with "where is the cheapest place to do this bit and that bit?" and "where is the cheapest place to rent a cessna and make holes in the sky?" and some "dodgy looking chap in Florida sold me a type rating and ran off with my money," that seems to be a recurring theme on some of these forums.
Of course it isn't always that way, but also it isn't what these airline companies want in their limited cadet schemes. In all fairness if you want to crusade against some of the real "scam" artists, you would find fertile territory in some of these "modular" providers.
In any event, it doesn't change the facts.