I'm okay with spending resources in an inefficient way if it helps the poor. I'm less okay with bringing back hereditary aristocracy. I'm very much not okay with Harrison Bergeron.
Suppose we did eliminate the legacy advantages, social connections, admission based on ability to pay, that doesn't change the fact that the rich always have a leg up on the competition.
> "...that doesn't change the fact that the rich always have a leg up on the competition."
All of the proposals other than meritocracy so far gives the rich even more of a leg up over everyone else, which is why meritocracy continues to enjoy widespread support. Meritocracy focused on objective measures and unbiased assessment at least gives talented ordinary people a chance at outcompeting the rich.
