Ultimately it's a political problem - but not necessarily in the obvious sense.
The most successful and fun cultures reward inventiveness and positive social contributions, and include some element of challenge and competition.
But using money and markets to make decisions about the kinds of activities that are rewarded turns out to be an inefficient, short-sighted and often surreal way to manage what does and doesn't get valued.
I'm quite happy with the idea that an economy where it's possible to raise $1 million in funding for an app like Yo! while the many apps that do something with longer term benefits struggle for commercial support has some issues with rational resource allocation.
Not to mention the outrageous bubbles and the epic acquisition disasters that litter the Internet ruins.
If you believe otherwise I'd like to see you argue why.
So to be sure, the opposite extreme is just as ridiculous as suggesting that every person exists in a bubble where their effort correlates exactly with outcome. But when the awareness of systemic advantage is absent (as it certainly is), I see staking out a far extreme opinion like this as a challenge to find a more reasonable center.