I think we're talking past each other a little bit.

You're talking in the aggregate and making some good points.

I am talking about what concretely I am seeing on the ground. It's become a little too easy to churn out junk that looks plausible enough to pass the initial sniff test but that ultimately results in negative productivity. Someone has to go back and not only redo the initial work but also deal with all the knock-on effects. It's unclear to me that these effects are offset by productivity gains elsewhere. This can also result in highly problematic incentive structures: the initial launch ticks some box, whoever did it gets rewarded and then someone else is left to pick up the pieces. Higher overall cost to the orgnisation and worse experience for the customers than doing it well in the first place.

Not totally clear how to fix this other than by shifting towards longer-term incentive structures (which have their own drawbacks).

None of this is completely new, but has become 10X easier thanks to the current generation of tooling.

This is in addition to my concerns around what this is doing to our junior developers' skills.

Maybe the tooling will soon get good enough that nobody has to ever write any code except for enjoyment, but it's not clear to me that this is the trajectory we're on.