Hi Gareth,

Thanks for your thoughts!

To your question about point #2, I agree that people already have this perspective--that people get what they deserve. But, I think the critical difference between today and a true meritocracy is that today there exists a sliver of doubt in everyone's mind that the system is rigged--that some people have advantages over others that aren't deserved (like private schooling, tutoring, etc.).

However, in a meritocracy in which the playing field has been completed leveled and the only thing that distinguishes one person from the next is genetics, this "sliver of doubt" is removed. We now assume, with much more confidence, that everyone is getting what they deserve.

So, then we have the same degree of wealth inequality we have today, but now we believe more firmly than ever that this distribution is just.

To me, the central problem is that if we continue to define what people "deserve" based on their contribution to the economy, people will continue to be left behind. I don't think equality of opportunity addresses this issue at all.

What do people deserve? I have no idea--but I don't think the "worth" of a human can be defined in economic terms, alone--and I think we're leaning too far in this direction today.