I am accepting that (most?) interesting jobs are using frameworks.
I still think that framework use can bring on 80/20 rule Dietzler's Law hells, and almost by definition makes debugging tougher (since what you're looking at in the browser is more and more removed from the code you as a developer actually wrote - a coder is forced to the techniques of holism without the fallback of reductionism) but there are some pluses, and a lot of smart people really embrace these advantages.
Even though Plain Old JQuery (along with some clunky Server Side Include for rough reusable modules) proved its value for a rich and complex application at Alleyoop, I have to accept that not everyone believes this is a sustainable, scalable pattern - and also I might not have really rich experience with "one page applications", we got much better mileage when we switched to logical functional breaks tied into various html pages.
I have to remind myself of the learning curve I had to master, to get talented at bending jQuery and CSS to my will. Sometimes I think the big frameworks fanbase has a lot of folks who actually don't dig HTML5/JS/CSS basics as much, so they don't mind the gap between browser and written code. But this is an unfair assumption.
What's Wrong With Angular, a retort Defending Angular, and then the original author assembled a piecemeal list of Angular.js alternatives; getting the functionality that people long for "À la Carte", not buying whole houses when you just want the hightech kitchen.