1. Yes, valid point on "all workers trained in x are interchangeable" -- but there's a contrast here between jobs in the 1000s and jobs in the 1-10s. Problem is

1. Yes, valid point on "all workers trained in x are interchangeable" -- but there's a contrast here between jobs in the 1000s and jobs in the 1-10s. Problem is, the "average" level jobs are relegated to "race to the bottom", leaving a dog-eat-dog realm where only top 1-10% star/superstar can attain a profitable career. I realize your focus and perspective is skewed to small, entrepreneurial startups, but most STEM workers are employed or contracted with large corporate (or government) organizations. In my experience, a great many computer science graduates are not working in their chosen major, and it exacerbates as they age. 2. Yes, there is a "huge difference between great programmers and people merely trained in computer science". OTOH, it used to be that aspiring programmers could bootstrap their way up (even many without formal "Computer Science" education) but now that age has passed, and instead it's expected that someone would just be waltz in at the superstar level. It's a strong bias against anyone without necessary means to devote time and energy to pursuing such a course. 3. "Liberal-leaning" and "labor unions" are not sympatico -- the relationship was a tenuous one, and really only in effect for the duration of the New Deal coalition.