https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/milton-friedman-shovels-vs-sp...
If you cannot do the job without things like React, Angular, or jquery you may not be qualified to write that code. On a bigger level if you cannot create an original application from scratch you aren’t a senior developer and if you don’t measure things you aren’t an engineer.
Nearly every other professional line of work has solved for this with some combination of licensing and/or broker/agent model. Developers tend to be scared shitless of industrial baselines of qualification assessments.
Again, I am saying all this as someone who wrote JavaScript for employment for 15 years and still love writing in the language.
Job creation for the sake of it isn't a good thing. What matters is whether it creates actual value, and does so efficiently.
The thrust of this, and many similar articles, is that it JS frameworks were largely a very inefficient, ineffective solution to a nonexistent problem.
The fact that they're ALL now SSR-first - without the robust and comprehensive functionality of longstanding ssr frameworks, cms etc - proves this.
Back then, choosing JavaScript felt like choosing simplicity. You didn't need to be a computer scientist to build something with js. But maybe that simplicity was was a long-term trap. It's like we all joined a party because the entrance was free, but no one told us each drink would cost a week's salary. Why bother, we're not the ones paying the bill right?