The fallacies here are multiple:

1) the assumption that intelligence can actually be measured (in which case it's really just "analytical intelligence"), 2) the assumption that other types of intelligence are less important, 3) the fact that you can't even measure creativity, period.

I have a 148 IQ (and I'm a programmer- of COURSE I have high analytical intelligence) and I have been consistently humbled by the "less intelligent."

Simple.

You don't need to measure anything like intelligence or creativity to arrive at someone's market worth. Just measure, or estimate, the value of their output.

So: how much value are they creating that other humans are prepared to pay for?

You mean like physical ability is ridiculously overcompensated in sports? Yeah we really need to make sure to foster those people with obviously better genetics and weed out the inferior ones...

Sports pay baffles me as well, but Lebron can make a cup of coffee.

Intelligence is compensated by having higher social status. Nobody is going to ask their barista for a heart transplant.