Why does that logic not go the other way, too?

Don’t care about who you sit next to? Have a discount!

Suppose you operate an airline, and your costs increase (e.g. fuel, labor, etc). Your options are to divide the increase equally by number of seats, or you increase price differently based on customer’s ability and willingness to pay.

I do not see what is “wrong” about the latter. In fact, the latter would allow maintaining more access to air travel for those who can afford it the least.

I don’t care for airport lounges, why should I pay for them? Same for bigger seats, or checked bags, or alcoholic drinks, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination

> I don’t care for airport lounges, why should I pay for them? Same for bigger seats, or checked bags, or alcoholic drinks, etc.

But they can, and will, always stretch this further than it should go.

It's like a restaurant that charges you extra for cutlery. Some cultures eat with their hands, and probably plenty of people would take a discount to do so. But it ruins the experience in the long term, and then the industry demands a bailout and we all get to pay more taxes for a shitty experience so they can buy back shares to boost the stock.

Eventually "basic economy" becomes a single iron maiden at the back of the plane used to punish the lowest-paying passenger for not knowing about its existence.

>Why does that logic not go the other way, too?

Because the "sticker" price is prominently advertised, so advertising a lower price than nickel-and-diming up leaves a sour taste in people's mouths rather than advertising a higher price then offering a discount, even if the final prices are the same. Of course, everyone shops for flights on comparison websites, so their only metric is that sticker price, and airlines have to engage in this sort of stuff to be competitive.

What’s wrong is providing a floor that’s beneath human dignity.

Imagine if they charged extra for seat belts, or getting help evacuating after a crash. Some people would be willing to take the extra risk in exchange for paying less. You let more people access air travel. People who value safety can pay extra for more of it. There would be rightful outrage.

Something like lounge access is firmly in the realm of reasonable price discrimination. Charge extra, certainly! But something like charging extra to sit with your travel companions is bullshit. That sort of thing should be strongly rejected.