The current state has been thus for all of about a decade, maybe two if you want to get technical about it. It remains to be seen whether it sticks around for the long term. It is also debatable whether this really represents an improvement, much less a continual one. With the increasing availability of the basics to launch a web application, the expected value of doing so has declined correspondingly.
Even if we take it as given that relatively wealthy American programmers have experienced continual improvement in their lot over the past couple of decades, that doesn't mean that we will continue to do so - or that everyone else has experience anything remotely similar. I would argue that we - developers - have experienced more upward mobility than most careers in the last couple of decades, and it is precisely because of this that we are relatively privileged.
In short, our experience doesn't necessarily generalize to society at large.
I don't want to get drawn into a really long debate, I just have two things to say: 1. People aren't born developers, plumbers, etc., it's a career you choose 2. The technology that enables these things is not going to disappear, of that we can be pretty sure
The question, as another commenter posted elsewhere in this thread, is: does it scale?
Sure, you choose your career (to a large extent) but society needs developers AND plumbers, and too many people choosing to be developers would push down developer wages to the point where being a developer would no longer be desirable. It can't work for everyone.
We need a solution that does not create an underclass of people that society needs but does not value. In a truly fluid job market in which there was always hiring in every industry and every worker was able and prepared to do any kind of job, capitalism might take care of that. Unfortunately, that's not reality.
I think that the system we have is much better than many others that have been tried in the past, but that doesn't mean that it's optimal or that we should stop trying to improve.
This right here is an excellent point, and very well made. Everyone is pretending you can just run out and start your own business tommorrow if you want. Question is, who'd be unclogging the toilets, sweeping the floors, and teaching the children then?
" 1. People aren't born developers, plumbers, etc., it's a career you choose"
I didn't imply that they are, but ignoring that people have innate abilities - and by extension, innate weaknesses - that shape their choices is simplistic.
"2. The technology that enables these things is not going to disappear, of that we can be pretty sure"
I didn't say it would. However, the economic conditions that make working in fields related to it probably eventually will.
One point though is that if you follow the economic system that produces the greatest technological progress, then at least you get to keep those advances forever, whereas if you count on something that's suppossed to keep the economy steady and fair to all, and then that doesn't work out, what are you left with?
Anyway I agree, 'does it scale' is a totally valid point and I often think it myself when people give life lessons on Hacker News. Social scalability I call it. But like I said, the ins and outs of how to apply the principle to the argument at hand are just too long to get into here.
Even if we take it as given that relatively wealthy American programmers have experienced continual improvement in their lot over the past couple of decades, that doesn't mean that we will continue to do so - or that everyone else has experience anything remotely similar. I would argue that we - developers - have experienced more upward mobility than most careers in the last couple of decades, and it is precisely because of this that we are relatively privileged.
In short, our experience doesn't necessarily generalize to society at large.