Yeah, that's a really interesting philosophical / ethical point, I think -- the "pure" Austrian view, so far as I can tell from reading Mises and others, is that money is really the world's vote on how much value a person provides to the collective.

It seems glaringly obvious to me that this surface-level read misses a lot of stuff, or at least, requires some deep nuance to make sense of. For one, you have to be very clear on what your terms mean, e.g., what it means to "provide value" -- it's easy to confound that with "being a decent human being" (and now we have to define decent), and those are correlated, but not identical. We all know rich assholes and psychopaths. But there's nothing that says a psychopath couldn't delight hundreds of millions people, e.g., Steve Jobs.

Anyway, it's a worthy thing to wrestle with.