I don't think bands have ever been able to make a living selling music.
This is pretty much it. They make money on touring, selling merch, other ventures. Back in the day, yes, money was made from selling music, but not that much. Record labels still got their cut in addition to the advances they gave artists (they acted more like a bank). But back in the day, people bought music. The 10 million or so copies that Michael Jackson sold, the 1-2 million from Madonna, etc. Now those numbers are not even close to the numbers in this era. So for 10 million albums sold, MJ could still get 1 mill after all advances and record label was paid off. But for a generational talent like MJ, there were hundreds of bands/artists trying to make it. And out of those bands, if you sold 2k copies, you would barely pay the record label advance and producers, etc, if at all.
I get that the Spotify (and streaming rates) are abysmal. Should the streaming rates be reviewed and increased? Absolutely. But bands/artists shouldn't expect to make a living from just streaming (pandemic issues aside, lack of touring). Spotify has filed to be publicly traded. Maybe artists should get a dividend of some sort...I don't know.
In my opinion, the best way to get paid being a musician is keep your music and do all of it yourself. There are plenty of current artists that do this: Plini has been very successful, Lights in Motion, Dave Kerzner, Marillion, Steve Vai, Animals as Leaders, Periphery, etc...It seems musicians like being signed to a record label and think that they will get them to the next level, but then they realize it was their biggest mistake and the label didn't help them at all. That old model of being signed to a label was flawed back then, and it's still flawed today (unless it's just a distribution deal). Right now it's harder to be a band/artists, but there is absolutely more opportunities to make a decent living making music.