To be fair, plumbers do make more than the average code jockey doing maintenance type programming at regular computer jobs (outside of the faang universe, there are a lot of average paying computing/coding jobs - think programming forms for web stores, coming up with fillable pdf forms for ordering, etc)

Plumbing is an essential service, and in emergencies, hourly rates can go into $300+/hour. So why don't everyone go into plumbing? Cause it's a shit job (/s)

Jokes aside, my take on the science job contradiction is that current American society does not respect nor want the products of science.

Think vaccines - when we have an emergency, everyone wants one, but in "normal times", think about where the pockets of the anti-vaccination movement have taken hold: rich communities in California where science should have had the best chance of surviving, but is struggling.

Communities in the American Southern states who are having trouble keeping evolution and science curriculums in tact are another example.

It's even worse....

The solutions to the "STEM shortage" are usually to ramp up training (BS/MS/PhD students, occasionally postdocs), without actually creating viable jobs for these folks when they finish. Many smart people don't want to get involved in a cutthroat job market, so either leave the field or never enter it. (The people who "left" science from my grad school cohort were all very smart; almost all of them could have cut it)

Meanwhile, cutting-edge research is mostly done by trainees who are learning as they go. This is important--we need future scientists as well as current ones--but it limits the projects and pace of research.

This is totally fixable too--fund more staff scientist positions and dial down the number of trainees. The NIH funds thousands of studentships and just a few (~50?) "research specialists."