If anyone is hungry or has to work who does not want to work in this age of technology it means a society cannot afford the luxury of the wealthy. That wealth needs to be taxed away. If the wealthy don’t like it they can work to make sure the economy works for everyone. More than ever the contribution of wealthy is in question. The utility of their wealth is in question as is their right to it.
Possibly the core or a core motivation behind the notion of strong materialism was the idea that there are special hips and by extension that the fruit of those hips is also special and entitled. On the contrary, the same world that produced those hips produced what came out of them.
By gift or by trust or so-called inheritance there should be no silver spooning freeloaders. Think of the odious politics and life grooming inside the families where said freeloaders are inclined to be overly concerned and competitive against siblings about all the parental ass they have to keep kissing for an indefinite amount of time. Think of the curse of the ultra-wealthy always having to wonder if their kid are only in it to get their money. Ending this means elevating the value of family.
When you see a billionaire who doesn’t support inheritance their thought processes aren’t far off from the above. Germany after WWII had a default situation like that above where high and low alike were forced into the forests to foraged for grubs and eat grass. Their physical sicknesses got better during that period. On the other hand Cambodia had something like the above gone very wrong and 3 years of having to run for the hills where possible.