Statistical extremes exist in any sufficiently large population (eg people). Extreme wealth concentration is a mathematical certainty if there are no regulation

Statistical extremes exist in any sufficiently large population (eg people). Extreme wealth concentration is a mathematical certainty if there are no regulations opposing it. While there is probably correlation to things like intelligence and effort, it is guaranteed to be weak at the extreme tails of the distribution. Perhaps you are much more likely to be intelligent if you are ultra wealthy, but not significantly more than intelligent people of average income. Perhaps you put in more effort than an average person, but there are physical and temporal limitations than place a hard upper bound. Success is much more correlated with what situation you are born into, what advantages you have, who your personal connections are, timing and ultimately luck. It’s not all that unlike an investor who has repeated success, writes a book, becomes famous for being a “good investor” only to find out they can’t repeat their success. It’s just statistics to a point. Historical counterfactual suggests that if a company like SpaceX, competition pressures would likely have driven similar innovation. Blue Origin might be a more dominant player, for instance. I’m sure this is all very hard to believe if you are a person of great success.