While I do think that there is room for individuality and competition, I don't think that it's logical that someone can be three orders of (base 10) magnitude better than average. Any such level of compensation / wealth is surely an irregularity that should be corrected by tax (law).
What you are talking about is equality of outcome.
I'm talking about equality before the law.
They are 2 different things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_before_the_law
I'm not sure what you mean by better but it's perfectly logical to me that someone can provide 3 orders of magnitude more economic value than someone else. The more leverage there is the more the differences between people will be exaggerated. By leverage I mean capital, education, technology, outsourcing, etc. I find it perfectly reasonable that someone who builds a product that enriches millions of lives should be paid orders of magnitude more than someone like a waiter who only services 1 person at a time.
It doesn't make sense to me that someone providing more value to society should be forced to pay more. That seems unfair to me.
HN: the place to go to hear rich people described with a straight face as an oppressed class.
I may be in the minority but I believe governments shouldn't discriminate based on income for the same reason they shouldn't discriminate based on gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. All people should be treated equal in the eyes of the law.