Yikes...you have an interesting premise with a weak defense. Not a fan of the 'some humans are superior argument' - it's the same theory that fueled slavery (the industry that the US was literally built on - and still prospers from).

In our world - those at the top - generally pay to play and pay to stay. They are insulated by regulations that favor them, and money to pay for political favors. Not all - I'm not anti wealth or anti success - but I am anti corruption.

Also, not to get too philosophical but success is defined as different things by different people. Let's say you were born into a tribe in Indonesia or Africa - a tribe that valued the ability to hunt and build shelter from raw resources ...your ability to make money would be useless.

In my younger days, I was definitely more Marxist leaning - I think that too is an extreme, with far too many pitfalls. At heart, I'm the kind of believer in the free market who would use my wealth and power to also provide opportunities for others to succeed. That old - pull yourself up by your bootstraps argument is so old and tiring and based on profound privilege.

I'm not an economist with a solution to wealth inequality - but rich getting richer due to corruption certainly isn't the answer. I think like all political and economic philosophies - capitalism has its merits and its limits.

Of course - with overregulation we've never seen real capitalism in action. Part of me wants to believe that there would be enough 'good' people to stop a few powerful from exploiting everything and everyone in their way....but history tells me different.

I was drawn to your post for its title - and expected a well thought out argument - was disappointed to see the (in my opinion) dangerous and flawed argument that rich people deserve to be rich.