[bumby]

>I have to wonder why only now this is considered a serious problem that undermines education, but it was mostly ignored when the option was only available to the rich kids.

I think you've answered your own question: it's a matter of scale. Systems can tolerate a certain proportion of bad actors but there is an inevitable tipping point where the number of bad actors grows to a point where the system becomes unstable.

But I 100% agree that university credentials are only a very rough proxy for competence. I also agree that internal motivation is better than external motivation.

Your suggestion is seen in other professions like medicine or capital "E" Engineering, where there are boards/exams and continuing education to certify competence in the form of licensure. This comes with its own problems, though, like how the licensing boards can become a cabal to protect their own self interests (see the complaints about the AMA limiting doctor licensure in an effort to maintain higher pay for physicians). It also gives more leverage to the individual, which many industry lobbyists would probably be against.