Your viewpoint is valid and I, like all PhD students, once believed in it wholeheartedly. I know there are some "true believers" who will go do the PhD at a top institution as you suggest, do well and thrive under reduced circumstances for 6 years, and then get a top TT track. Without bitterness or rancor - I say good for them.
I would caution against comparing ourselves to History PhDs. Modern history and economic history in particular have far better non-academic job prospects than we do. If anyone here has the end goal of NOT teaching Classics, I would advise them to take a far more direct route to their goal. E.g. if you want to work in public policy, get the relevant MA; if you want to go into consulting, undergrad recruitment is an option, etc. If you want to teach high school, get your teaching license and get started. Do not waste 6 years of your life; if you go into your chosen field after undergrad, you'll be so far ahead of the PhDs who scramble to leave academia at 30. I was skeptical when people told me this, but if you are doing the PhD just because you love Classics and want to learn more, do something else as your day job. Classics will always be there for you in your free time, and if you have a job that pays well, you can even hire your very own language or history tutor.
I agree that paying for MA or PhD are bad ideas.
To your final point, all I'll say is: freedom to work on your own schedule, a stipend for reading, and meeting new people (many of whom may be Big Names but are checked-out) is NOT a good reason to sink 6 years of time, opportunity cost and so on into a Classics PhD. 6 years is a lot of time in your 20s, a lot of time for saving for retirement, for saving for a mortgage, saving for a marriage and kids etc. (if that floats your boat!) which you will not be able to do as a Classics PhD student. Unless you are a true believer - by which I mean you know very well why you want to get the PhD, NEED it for your dream TT job, and you are very confident of your ability to finish on time - don't do it. Yes, a PhD can get you a job teaching high school or in consulting, but rarely do you actually NEED a PhD to work in those settings.
Every workplace has its miserable people and misanthropes, but at least in a workplace you'll be working towards a career, getting raises regularly, etc. The PhD does this, if you are going into TT teaching. But it does not do this if you're planning to start over in consulting or any other field. And for what it's worth, I do go to one of the schools you specifically mentioned, and the financial situation is not great. Cost of living around some of the T5/10 schools is very high. Not everyone wants to spend years as an RA (nor should they be blamed or penalized as 'giving up free money' for not choosing to live for years in undergrad dorms). 35k stipend = 29k after tax (generous numbers) = 27k after health insurance (at my school) = 2250/month for rent, food, transportation, and whatever else you might need. Doable but note that bedrooms in shared houses, the cheapest possible option if you're not an RA, go for 800-900 a month here. You will not starve but you will be eking out a tough existence, and this stipend is only guaranteed for 4-5 years (with teaching); afterwards you'll have to scrabble for courses to teach and for completion fellowships, extra funding etc. Travel funding is not as generous as it seems, in my Dept it's less than 3k over the entire period of the PhD, and often you have to pay first, then get reimbursed later. I am not the only one to complain about conditions - note that H., so I hear, has called a strike vote over issues including, but not limited to, stipends that do not reflect inflation and COL.
