A capitalist system must recognize that no individual, alone, can "earn" a gazillion bucks all by his own efforts. The whole society is involved. It is the society that purchases the goods/services offered by businesses. It is the society that creates the conditions that allow businesses to start up, survive and thrive. It is from the society that the labourers and middle managers come.
I have no problem whatsoever with an individual who, by initiating a business and managing it and providing his employees with competent direction and a decent income, gets as rich as he can. I'm happy for him. I want him to enjoy the fruits of his ingenuity while he is alive. BUT upon his death those others who contributed to that wealth ought to come in for their share. I see that wealth as being a good opportunity to guarantee all the future generations a decent start in life. This puts the rich man in the position of caretaker of wealth for future generations instead of thief of the fruits of the labour of others.
I have spoken of this to some who are rich enough to have earned the designation "wealthy". Often they are so locked-in to the mind-set of feudalistic direct-line inheritance that they cannot see that it is better for them to leave their children a good egalitarian society that offers all children an equal start, than for them to leave their children well off in a shitty system that contains so many desperate "have-nots" that their children will need to spend their entire lives working hard just to protect that wealth.
Yet it might amaze and please you how many people of wealth instantly see that this system would guarantee much that our present system cannot, to their children. Rich people are often greedy and selfish - but they're not usually any more stupid than anyone else. They love and want the best for their children just as you and I do.
It always dismays me how the socialist crowd always sees the wealthy as evil beings out to harm those who are not wealthy. They are not. They are just out to take advantage of a system that places a high premium on attaining great wealth. They are playing the game they were born into, by the rules as they are. That they can often change the rules to suit themselves is a function of our political system - the one we all appear to love and desire, that we call democracy.
When we tighten up those rules the rich may seek to loosen them up to their advantage again. It is up to us to see that they can't do so. It is surely not incumbent on the rich to support rules that limit their ability to gain more wealth at a cost to others in their society. It is up to society to put such rules in place and to keep them there.
In a proper capitalist system, wealth, having come from our society as all wealth does, will be returned to that society upon the death of those who have managed to amass it. It will be “inherited” equally as a basic birthright by all the children born into that society. All ought to have a basic income, from that birthright, so that no one will be forced to rent themselves out as wage-slaves. Employers would have to treat their employees more as partners (which they rightfully are) than as “rentable slaves” desperate to earn the means of survival. The attitude shift would be remarkable!