The parent specifically said "I'm not (and don't ever expect to be) paid the same as other equally qualified engineers on my team."

I understand your point, even if I think it's a little narrow, but the original comment seemed to apply that there was no point in even trying to achieve equal pay. That just totally baffles me.

Equal pay forces metric-based assessments which imo is detrimental. I think(?) that's what op what refering to. It's incredibly hard to evaluate how to pay 2 different people, allowing negotiation allows the free market to determine the price, which is the best way we have found as a society to allocate assets.

There main point following some of there other comment is

equally qualified != equally performant