I often see people say, "[Rich person] has 2000x your wealth - are they 2000x times smarter, more driven, more talented than you? No! Then how could they deserve it?"
This seems like a really gross misconception of value.
Example:
42
80
615
Conversation
You invent a water pumping system for your friend. Your friend doesn't have to walk to the river anymore; you've given him 1 hour of time a day. Wonderful!
Your tribe finds out; 50 people use the system too. Now 50 hours saved per day. Wonderful!
3
7
215
The local village, 2000 people, starts using the system. You've now contributed 2000 hours of value, *daily*, to the community. This is huge. Yes, you only made a water pump, but the value doesn't come from what you made, it comes from the benefit to the whole around you.
33
16
477
Replying to
Imagine instead that you rent the water pump to them. Your income in increases but now for every hour they saved by using the water pump they have to work an extra hour to pay for it. Does your value still increase?
4
2
Replying to
But in a capitalist society, that's exactly what would happen. It doesn't matter if it saves them time, it only matters if they THINK it saves them time. And he could easily sell the idea that it does.
2
1
Then make it slightly less. For every 2000 hours saved, make them pay you in 1900 hours of work, so you get 95% of the value you so generously provided. This explains big wealth gaps; "everyone simply gets 1 hour richer" doesn't. It's still win/win, but it's outright parasitic.
1