> A marketing analyst who knows a little bit of HTML coding is going to benefit. A secretary who knows a little bit of javascript is going to benefit. You'll n

> A marketing analyst who knows a little bit of HTML coding is going to benefit. A secretary who knows a little bit of javascript is going to benefit. You'll need to explain both of these because it isn't obvious why or how. Neither one would ever need to utilize those skills in their normal performance of their work. > A manager who understands some programming will certainly be more relaxed on set deadlines. A manager of what? If they're running an industrial size stamping press, I kind of doubt it. I feel like as a core skill knowing intermediate Microsoft Excel is more likely to result in productivity increases and personal enrichment for most non-IT people. Lists (sort, filter, input validation), calculations, statistics, automation, graphs, all a few weeks away in Excel as opposed to years away with programming. This type of "programming is a panacea" arguing is rarely explained from end to end. Instead, it is just an arguing thrown out without exploration or explanation, and we're just meant to buy it because programming is cool or whatever. The real reason programming has such a halo right now is that it is well paid, and the subtle implication is that everyone will eventually "see the light" and become a programmer and get a big pay/career bump. If programming is really a panacea imagine a world where it isn't a well paid skill/job/career, and then ask yourself why you're really arguing what you're arguing. People can make this same shallow argument about: accounting/finances, vehicle mechanics, cooking, medicine, sales/marketing, etc. And they're just as right about those as programmers are about this.