Well, I want to get rich as well, but this productivity and other factors creates this disparity:
This can be bad for economic growth (if you are a rich owner, you still need 90% of Americans to be able to buy your stuff) as well as bad in social ways (more crime, etc.). Eliminating the middle class - it seems most USAmericans who studied the rise of democracy and decline of monarchy and social classes would be quite uncomfortable with this elimination from both a social and economic point of view.
What about the idea of merit? Sure, Michael Jordan got rich on his talent and hard work. But we shouldn't be so ridiculously naive. Did everyone rich get there on the basis of meritocracy? Of course not. As I already stated many times, it's far easier for money to make money. If/when you're rich, you try to retain this money. Your biggest expense line item is taxes. So you try to minimize that. Executives are heavily paid in "deferred compensation" mostly because that makes sense, tax-wise. Personally after a certain point, I'd also far rather be paid in things like stock options and then pay capital gains taxes instead of income taxes later. What about schools? Thanks to Olivia Jade, Lori Loughlin, and William Singer, we now have some idea of the ridiculous lengths rich people have gone through to try to get their kids into top schools. Below that criminal level are other totally legal, moral ways to do it (that do require 10s or 100s of thousands of dollars), such as elite prep schools, various music, arts, sports lessons and competitions, tutors, donations, buying houses in certain neighborhoods, private admissions consultants costing 50k, etc., etc., etc.