Did I miss the part where they discuss the economics of having a larger worker pool? like how that would affect existing workers? that seems like an enormous question to not address fully.
As a butthurt American I only have one real gripe with what you said - our roads aren't free. Our taxes pay for them. I think we need to change this mentality and acknowledge that our taxes going to something else useful is actually a net good - not 'welfare.'
I think the obvious answer here is to go full open-source on the infrastructure. if they can afford to pay engineers to craft exploits, the can afford to pay engineers to fix them.
My guess is it has something to do with [1]. I remember growing up hearing that LA was planned by a large automotive manufacturer, hence it requires copious amounts of driving to fully experience the city. I couldn't find a reliable source with any cursory searching. Still, the linked article mentions LA specifically in one of the captions, so maybe there's a grain of truth to that.
Respectfully, I think that's an unrealistically high standard to set. Having a job that is stable and engaging with long term potential is an exceedingly rare find for any generation. And entry-level jobs are how you make your career - you work your way up.
My guess is that the market for high quality software engineering simply isn't there at scale. A lot of what we use day to day really just scrapes by the threshold of passable. So that's the bar they need to clear. If your customers are content paying you for 80% reliability, why pay for engineers who can deliver 5 9s?
Anonymity would not affect diversity, but it would not necessarily enforce it. Indeed until all races, genders, sexual orientation, socioeconomic strata, etc. apply in identical numbers, one must discriminate in order to guarantee diversity.
EDIT: Upon further reflection, anonymity could help combat ageism (scrubbing specific graduation and employment dates, for example). but in the general sense I believe the point still stands.
People are paying for that because employers are demanding it. Sure a few are begrudgingly realizing that an alma mater is irrelevant pedigree (the fact they can pay qualified people less without a degree surely helps), but the lion's share still filter for those with undergraduate degrees or higher. I have no idea how to change this, although personally I have two degrees and believe I would be orders of magnitude better at my profession had I simply worked on my own for the duration of my studies.