I've thought about this too. The life someone will have if they are born tall, handsome, and socially skilled will be much different than that of one who is th

I've thought about this too. The life someone will have if they are born tall, handsome, and socially skilled will be much different than that of one who is the opposite, even if their families make the exact same amount of money. I think it is because first, money is easy to measure. Everything else is not measurable, or not socially regarded as important to measure and compile information about and act on it. Second, money is the fairest thing in the world. One man's dollar is equal to an other's. You can't change your mannerisms, face, etc... but you can always get more money to even the scales. When things do not go our way, it lays bare the truth about reality, which is often intolerable and in congruent to the things we tell ourselves and want to believe. We may tell ourselves that we are smart, deserving, etc, but the money does not come - maybe because we are not inherently deserving, nor smart enough to warrant the amounts we desire. This leads me to look at the past sometimes, and understand why social conservatism still exists. Those sorts of structures may be arbitrarily constricting, unfair, immoral, etc - but the one thing they do that modernity does not is give assurances and a path to a certain future; not a perfect one, but one that is achievable and one you can feel secure in. The beautiful may be told that they cannot date 20 people due to social pressure. The fat will be called lazy and be monitored and pushed to fix it. Friendships will be forced by having people show up over and over and do some sort of charity or whatever together. Yes, income will also be addressed by expecting the more well off to fund many of these things, and shaming them into submission if they don't. Is it right? Being a modern man I would say no! Its horrendous and outdated. But at least it... tries to attempt to address these "problems".