IMO a bad idea anyway - as a software dev, even a bad one, you can create more value for more people at the same time. As a plumber you're only fixing one thing for one person at a time so there's a hard limit on how valuable that is.
The arrogance of HN sometimes
How do you explain software devs getting paid without providing any value?
The market is not efficient. A software developer being paid $100k doesn't mean they're providing the world with $100k of value. it just means they convinced management/HR to pay them $100k for turning up 250/365 days.
I suggest checking out "bullshit jobs" by David Graeber :)
I mean isn't value based on what you can convince someone else to pay for the service/product. Are Mac's really valued at 10 grand or whatever, but rather simply what they've convinced someone to pay for that.
Also, isn't that the same for plumbers for example? Plumbers being paid around $150/hr (this is what is the going rate for a good plumber in Australia) are providing the world with $150/hr of value. It just means that they convinced the customer to pay them $150/hr for turning up to their house and taking a look at a leaky tap, one that could be fixed in about 5 mins.
The individual may not provide 100k, but N developers probably provide (at least) 100Nk value. That or the market is very broken.
As an aside, you and the parent both say "most", which I would doubt but is difficult to prove either way.
Edit: other reply beat me to it