How do you know things wouldn’t be much much worse if there were no standards for being a civil/structural engineer or architect that have been refined over long periods of time? Imagine municipalities taking the lowest bids by far thrown out there by any rando that decided they can make a few bucks by welding together the supports for a bridge or designing a really interesting building that will just cave in on itself a decade hence.

There are tons of physical engineers working on safety critical hardware that are not required to have some BS piece of paper that says they're safe.

You do not need a credential to work on EV charging infrastructure, rockets, crew capsules to ferry astronauts to the ISS, or many, many other things.

That's how you know, because those fields are not less safe. It's an easy comparison.

> work on EV charging infrastructure

Could you expand on that? Are you saying that you don’t need a licensed electrician to connect a new EV charging terminal at installation time?

This thread is about engineers.

I am talking about engineers who design the EV charging terminal.

It's not common anymore (like, in the past three decades), but "taking the lowest bid from some rando" is definitely still a thing.

Such delays are overwhelmingly political, not engineering. The local government demanding yet another environmental impact review is not an engineering cost - it is a scope change.

Scope change is really not a foreign concept in the field of software engineering, including politically driven

Licensure injects politics into the heart of engineering.