What about free software? That is, how can human society achieve good quality free software if it is physically impossible for free software to develop? Because personal income for free software developers is important.
I guess since it's personal income, then it's a personal problem for free software developers then? That's fine, but income level coincidentally correlates with high quality software.
Options include… Volunteer. Donate. Ask the elected officials that represent you to choose open source software for government use cases. Encourage grants to fund open source. If you’re at a company, contribute back to open source.
Government officials for republics function to serve a greatest common denominator that doesn't even exist in reality. So there's no political representation at all for free software.
Well, the greatest common denominator for political representation does exist. But it by its nature excludes free software as even a talking point. Namely that capitalism is mutually exclusive from free software. Capitalism hates free software to the point that free software cannot even literally get a word, a voice, or a conceptualization that can help refine it.
That leaves us with the only realistic options for supporting quality efforts in free software being volunteer work that isn't empowered. Everything goes downhill from there. Grants and company lip service are only superficial reactions to the free software problem.
Capitalism is perfectly fine with FOSS software especially if it can use the idealism behind it to save on labor costs. Especially since the definitions of both "free software" and "open source" explicitly reject non-commercial licenses as heretical.
I guess since it's personal income, then it's a personal problem for free software developers then? That's fine, but income level coincidentally correlates with high quality software.
I guess free software just doesn't matter then.