Because the marginal cost of selling a license is often close to zero, and companies often add pointless cloud features to lock people into subscriptions they don't want.
It's possible to write software on your own or with a small team, and sell it for low prices, and make a decent income from it. I know it's possible because I've been doing it for a decade.
But somehow over the years software developers have moved everything to subscriptions, prices are going up, and everyone competes for the attention of the people with lots of disposable income.
Judging by people in this comment section, no one has any disposable income to compete for, because $5/day is an insane poverty-making amount of money to spend on things.
I'm confused what price you think most of these softwares should be charging. If you exclude things like MLB or Disney+ where their cost is tethered to the amorphous costs of entertainment, most of these don't cost all that much per day given how much a full time developer earns/costs per day.
The marginal cost of a copy has never mattered in the history of copyright. We're not talking about an item from a factory here; we're talking about works of mental labor that frequently take many thousands of person-hours and often tens to hundreds of millions of dollars to produce the first copy.
It's possible to write software on your own or with a small team, and sell it for low prices, and make a decent income from it. I know it's possible because I've been doing it for a decade.
But somehow over the years software developers have moved everything to subscriptions, prices are going up, and everyone competes for the attention of the people with lots of disposable income.