You know, you sound an awful lot like a troll. As much as you spout off about reading comprehension like you're my superior or something in that regard, you're relying on one quote taken completely out of context to back your point up. That's not a good argument.
Maybe you should explain this quote from the Manifesto then... "Low-paying organizations do poorly in competition with high-paying ones, but they do not have to do badly if the high-paying ones are banned."
If you read the preceding paragraphs, he mentions that programmers who share code will not be able to charge as much for that code. He doesn't say they will give it away for free, and he also enumerates some non-monetary benefits that programmers can receive from coding the "GNU Way".

In your out-of-context quote, he is not advocating banning high-paying jobs, which you may be claiming (I'm not sure!). But this is not what he is saying -- placed in context, he is simply stating a fact: that programmers are unhappy at low-paying jobs only when higher-paying ones are available to them. The example he used is one that was close to his heart, the programmers at the MIT AI lab. He claims they were perfectly happy while hacking at MIT, and were lured away by job offers where their happiness was not increased, only their money.

The whole section is a claim that money does not have to be constantly changing hands in order to motivate people to work. This has nothing to do at all with businesses capitalizing on free software as a product!