I think the problem here is the presupposition that people are (or should be) rewarded based on their intelligence or their talent. Having this presupposition entitles you to think that no person should amass a huge wealth, because, as the study suggests, no one is order of magnitudes smarter or more talented than the average person.

But in fact people are rewarded based on the perceived value they bestow on others. Let's take Jeff Bezos for example. We can all agree that he is not orders of magnitude more intelligent or more talented than the average Joe. But what he has built, namely Amazon, brings value to a huge number of people that voluntarily give money in exchange for the products and services that he provides. So if what you do impacts a whole lot of people and they give you money for what you do, that means you bring more value into their life than the money they give you, so it's only normal for you to gather a huge wealth.

I don't think luck plays such an important role in the `abnormal` distribution of wealth. I mean yes, opportunities matter and a child born in a poor country will have to work more and harder than a child born in a developed country with institutions that allow the creation of wealth, but other than that initial difference, I think it's more important to make the right decisions presented to you. Like many people said before me, there are a lot of people who heard of bitcoin in 2010 and 2011 but they didn't choose to invest or mine then, not recognizing the importance that this new technology will have in the future. But those who did were not necessarily lucky, because the opportunity was there for everyone to take.