Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did not say this. If I build it in five days - and for simplicity assuming no future maintenance, support or service costs - than I would want to make say $5k for five days of work. Profit is revenue minus costs and costs include salaries. So I never said anyone should do anything for free. But I have a problem with making money without doing any work. If you put in a week of work, then you should be paid for a wee…
All the money you make based on work is really free-riding on earlier investments in knowledge anyway. Why should you make $100/hr just because you did some studying 10 years ago? If you do a week of work, you should just be paid for that week of work, not for your 10 years of past experience and your week of work, right? It seems like you're taking a pretty weird stance against market economics, made more strange by…
I have nothing against market economics in general, I would welcome competitors driving those outsized profits down. When I say everyone should earn roughly the same, then this is what I think would be a desirable state, but in this case market dynamics are unlikely to yield this result because not everyone can switch to doing every possible job for all kinds of reasons.
This is what makes unskilled jobs pay relatively bad despite this work being important and often hard or unpleasant, but the mechanism to change that, leaving for better payed higher skilled jobs to reduce supply is just not available to many.
So I would think that I am in general in favor of market dynamics, but it has to be a working market.