A lot of these principles add up to essentially an economic version of the rubber-band mechanic common in game design. If you're winning a racing game, the game will reduce your top speed. If you're last, it'll increase it. It keeps the gap between players from growing too large.
Racing games, where the stakes are low because it's a GAME, still do their best to prevent anyone from being left behind, or getting so far ahead that there's no one else even near them. Why on earth do we care less about it when it comes to having basic needs met?
And if your answer is that you think you SHOULD be able to amass wealth so far beyond what others have that you're not even in the same territory that they are, that you can't even see them, maybe consider why you'd want that.
But society should demand more from those with more, and give more help to those with less. We do the opposite right now.
When I worked at Microsoft, restaurants gave me discounts--almost everything cost less. When I was unemployed and struggling to pay both rent and groceries, checking overdraft fees, etc. This system is backwards.
