It really isn’t thought. I might help 10 very reach people and make a lot of money or I might help 1000 and do it for free. Money is not an excellent proxy metric. Money is just money.
I know you might, but our working lives, which are how most of us spend most of our effort, eventually end up in things people buy directly, or things governments buy. If our skills/contacts/thinking/strength/work ethic is/are valuable to others, they are generally compensated better.
Who do you think helped more people by managing a project, Linus Trovalds (Linux) or Elon Musk (Tesla)? Now compare who has more money. Money is just a proxy for wealth, and there are several ways to acquire wealth (sometimes by even screwing people over). And even if you are making a median argument (most people you know work in offices) you are talking ask if there is no unfairness ever in salaries. This is a very reductionist way to look at the world.
I'm not saying it's a perfect metric, but I also don't see how the context of getting paid a lot to do a job relates to what you're saying. A general principle is not reductionalist.
