"Imagine two plants growing side by side. Each day they will compete for sunlight and soil. If one plant can grow just a little bit faster than the other, then

"Imagine two plants growing side by side. Each day they will compete for sunlight and soil. If one plant can grow just a little bit faster than the other, then it can stretch taller, catch more sunlight, and soak up more rain..." I would rephrase this as: "Imagine two plants growing side by side. Each day sunlight and soil are divided between them. If, on a particular day, one plant happens to catch more sunlight or soak up more rain, then (all else being equal) it will stretch taller, catch more sunlight, and soak up more rain" This rephrasing removes the intentional stance. From this perspective, the unequal distribution of wealth is a consequence of physics. As an illustration, consider a T-junction branched-pipe with fluid flowing out through the branch. Any tiny irregularity in the pipe leads to a highly asymmetrical flow. My question is, given that the distribution of wealth is merely physics, are we to through up our hands and accept it as destiny ?