>>Basically I equate "deserve it" with "have earned it."
>>Essentially, I'd like to see a meritocracy where people who have talent can find a way to recognize it and if they are willing to work can develop it can flourish.
>>I recognize that not everyone can flourish in that scenario, but -with a few exceptions- the devil take the hindmost- that's the way evolution works.
>
>So, the people who have talent can do whatever they want with their money?

That's a leap, Michael.
You should earn all you can, but there are limits to what you can do with money.
That's the Social Contract. You accepts limits on your power(and money is power) as an individual for certain benefits accorded to members of the state.
For example:
You can't buy my Camry unless I decide to sell it to you.
You can't decide to build a nuclear weapon and nuke a competitor.
You can't buy up all your competitors and obtain monopolistic power.
You can't buy the New Jersey turnpike or the Golden Gate bridge.
You can't bribe corrupt officials no matter how many of them would love to have you do that.
You have to surrender some of your money in taxes to keep the Social Contract moving.

In return, you get to keep the money that's left and the police and the courts will keep other people from taking it from you.
If you're Exxon Mobil, the government will even send the USS Harry Truman to protect your shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf.

As I said, I'd like to see limits on passing money to progeny, but that's wishful thinking on my part.