"Not being able to code in 2050 will be like not being able to read in 1980". I'm sure you've heard some variant of that sentence thrown about by any number of fool who thinks that ‘technology’ begins and ends at the word ‘computers’. Politicians in particular love the idea of teaching people to code because it's a simple and positive message that ignorant voters feel good about, that would be difficult to publicly disagree with without looking like an asshole who wants to stop people from learning things. Of course everyone will need to know how to code in the future! Computers will be absolutely everywhere! If you don't know how to code then you'll be unable to function in society!

If you're a member of the ignorant general public, then that last part made perfect sense; our lives will be driven in the future by technology and so it stands to reason that everyone needs to learn how to code - except, if you think about it for, like, 2 seconds, you'll realize that it's complete bullshit. Why would everyone need to learn how to write code? To interact with the technologically-driven world that the future will be? As opposed to what? our non-technological present? Our world is already largely driven by technology. That part isn't in the future, it's here now. If technology's role in the future would make coding as important as reading is today, then most of our planet, even most first-world citizens, should be doing very poorly. Technology drives our present, and if coding isn't critical to life today, then why would that suddenly be the case tomorrow?

Answer: It won't ever be the case because anyone who actually thinks that knowing how to write code will be vital to life in the future is both ignorant, and lacks critical thinking skills.

Then there's the fact that, as technology advances, less technical knowledge is required to operate that technology, not more. How much code does the user, any user, have to know, to interact with a modern computer or a smartphone? How much text does the user have to write at all? How much code have you had to write in the last six months in order to live your daily life? The answer (unless you’re a programmer) is, and always will be, zero. In fact, unless specifically designed to teach or somehow use code in operation, any software or technology that requires coding skills to operate it will be specialty software, designed for use by people trained in it's use. It'll be designed to complete specific tasks in a business or industrial setting, not for use by Joe Blow to order his groceries.

The other part of the "coding will be like reading" argument is that people will need to be able to understand computer code to understand the world around them. Today, we understand the world around us by reading. Signs on the road, prompts on the screen, news and information online. Where does coding come into "understanding the world"? This is similar to the "future different to present" argument, but proponents insist that code will somehow, for some reason, replace written human language in most facets of our lives. Why would that ever happen? Because future, that’s why.

Finally, when you refute all other arguments, a believer of this "coding/reading" nonsense will point to books, and tell you all about the fact that if you don't have the ability to write, then you likely don't have the ability to read, extending the idea into a false equivalence involving software and writing code. "How can someone interact with software or machines if they don't know how to code?". Again, technology isn't the future. Computers of all kinds dominate our lives today. No-one alive right now writes computer code just to interact with software, so why would that change in the future? Software designers work hard specifically to make software as easy and efficient to use as possible. This is where the writing/coding analogy completely breaks down; you need to know English if you want to read a book that's written in English, but you don't need to know Python is you want to use software written using Python. "Creating" isn't the same as "using". Just like you don't need to know how to make a chair or bake a cake if you want to sit or eat, you will never need to know how to write software if you want to create software.

So there you go, anyone who thinks that our society will somehow revolve around coding in the future for some undefined reason. I guess everyone will be busy writing code to work in trivial fields like medicine or law. Don't get me wrong; coding is an important skill, but the list of people who absolutely needs to learn it begins and ends at "anyone who wants to write software".