> their role was to introduce a system of art or craft to a new individual, to instill in them the idea of standards, quality, consistency, and perfection".
I always thought that their goals was controlling the supply of goods and services to maintain high prices and to prevent competition from ruining profit margins (of course not necessarily universally bad for consumers since guilds generally still maintained some sort of minimum quality standards).
> than guilds to take the risk of training someone up to industry standards.
Because as an apprentice you were effectively bound to your master and had to work him for a paltry wage for a number years just to get a chance to advance your career. Since workers are now free to leave whenever they want and have no obligations to the company that spent money/resources to train them those companies have few incentives to do that.
> I believe that it would be very beneficial to society to create schemes that encourage learning with a similar system.
We might as well bring back indentured servitude while we're at it? Otherwise who is going to pay for this?