Odd to put this forward for a profession that pays 150 - 500K with a 1-4 years training. And software one of the fastest growing and most innovative parts of th

Odd to put this forward for a profession that pays 150 - 500K with a 1-4 years training. And software one of the fastest growing and most innovative parts of the economy. Breaking that seems bad, right? It would be quite a bit better if most other industries eliminated licensing. Because they become grab bags for random political whims that have nothing to do with ability to do the job: https://www.nelp.org/publication/unlicensed-untapped-removing-barriers-state-occupational-licenses/ https://www.nelp.org/publication/unlicensed-untapped-removin... https://www.cato.org/policy-report/september/october-2018/tangled-mess-occupational-licensing https://www.cato.org/policy-report/september/october-2018/ta... Because they force workers to do hundreds of hours of unnecessary and expensive training: https://nsjonline.com/article/2021/10/instructors-salon-owners-fight-for-occupational-licensing-reform/ https://nsjonline.com/article/2021/10/instructors-salon-owne... Most of all we don't have any examples of nimble adaptable licensing, software development would not be some magical exception. For low innovation professions, where the knowledge doesn't change much over 20 years, licensing is bad. For a high innovation profession it would be crippling. What if when switching from Java to Python to Javascript you had to do 400 hours of training and sit for 2 days of tests each time? What if each of those transitions had taken industry an extra year to make because of excess oddball training requirements? What if certain members of your team couldn't "get up to speed" by being mentored on some system, but first had to be licensed before they could commit any code at all? Far better for other occupations to copy our very successful one. And as life advice, avoid any profession that does require licensing, it is usually a bad deal.