I love how 99% of the replies in the comments bickered about the specific prices she listed as being off by 20% 30% or whatever. And otherwise mentioned that photographers are being replaced by amateurs and photographers are just complaining.
I think a large part of what is missing in this argument is the skill photography takes.
If anything photographers are under paid, it's been studied and shown that it takes around 10,000 hours to be good at a skill and with photography it's no different. Even being paid at minimum wage, a highly skilled wedding photographer with 7 years experience, and 10,000 hours of practice on their free time in that time frame would add around $1,000 to each wedding just to reimburse them for building their skill set if spread over all those years, and even without that most photographers barley make ends meat due to overhead.
Skill isn't worthless, and if you think it is, then I encourage you to walk through a war zone with your uncle bill watching your back with an M16 and see how comfortable you are with the idea that equipment is all that's important. Oh that's right, you'd soil yourself 10 times over and beg for someone with military training or a special forces escort.
When I was initially learning photography my rate of creating truly stunning photos was maybe 1:5,000. After years of effort I was able to move that to 1:500 and then 1:250. When I switched to shallow depth of field lenses things got even harder, and I moved to 1:500 again. Then with more practice I got to 1:150. Adding in more and more complexity and more challenging and expensive equipment moved the rate at which I created good results down further and more practice brought it up. Finally after years and years of even more effort I can make a stunning photo about 1 out of ever 40 times I push the shutter button.
Your uncle bill with more money than skill makes really good photos every five thousand times he presses the shutter button. A pro makes good photos every 50 times or less. If you want to pay 100 friends and relatives $200 to shoot your wedding, go ahead. It will cost $20,000. Or for a low low price, I will do it for $4,000, and you'll get the exact same number of good photos.
On the back end it's also worth mentioning editing. I started out as a photo editor doing work for major magazine and gravitated gradually to photography. Every keeper I take results in 20 minutes of editing. For a 4 hour wedding I would spend 120 hours editing photos. That's another $1000 at minimum wage. Editing is the single greatest difference maker when it comes to photos.
In any case it doesn't take someone "just a day" to shoot a wedding. A dedicated wedding photographer will spend that entire week editing those photos. The effective pay rate for a $3,000 wedding shoot is $37 per hour. For seasonal highly skilled traveling work that supplies it's own very expensive tools and maintains all it's overhead. That is a very reasonable price.