it could not have happened and would not have happened, for essentially economic reasons.
The interesting alternative histories are ones that turn on a single fortuitous event.
You said it couldn't happen, then said that there are ways it could have happened.
Also, if you don't want to be part of the discussion, you are free to stay out. other people are participating and enjoying themselves.
You are contradicting yourself.
Hitler left orders not to be awakened so he slept in on D-Day. Rommel had left his post. Think that wouldn't have changed things?
Stalin had dozens of warnings that Hitler planned to invade. What if he'd taken even one seriously?
What if Hitler had let the Army get the glory at Dunkirk and steamrolled the troops on the beach?
I can think of dozens of times the course of the War changed by the actions of one person.
It's one of those things that sound reasonable until you actually spend a minute thinking about the details.
Minting money. Starting a post office. Borders. People who work out of state.
It doesn't matter, because what I enjoyed might sound terrible to you.
Like I said, two different jobs will have a similar skill set, and the book gives you a long list of all types of jobs. It even breaks them down by how much education you need.
[off topic]
Get this book. "Discover What You Are Best At" by Linda Gail. It's a series of self tests that gauge what skills you already have, and then lists the jobs that use those skills. For example, a hair dresser and a nurse both need good social skills and good dexterity; two totally different jobs with a similar skillset.
I spent my whole life thinking I'd never find a job I actually liked, then I got the book and it led me to a career I enjoyed and got a decent salary.
You didn't challenge anyone to improve themselves. You tried to impose your ideas on other people. There's a difference.
Cheers.