We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Why is a CEO who is paid tens of millions of dollars due to his Golden Parachute after running a company that employed hundreds or thousands vilified but the guy who wins that or more in a lottery is beatified?
The lottery winner is beatified only in the moment he receives his winnings. Ten minutes later, if he refuses to donate it to his relatives, neighbors, and the Democratic party, he's as vilified as the executive.
I think the trick is: if you're poor, anything you do is either excused or lauded or both. Riot, murder, steal, whatever--the root cause is poverty, it's not your fault. If you're rich, anything you do is tainted. The corporate executive is rich all along, so of course he's evil. The lottery winner starts off poor, and his virtue survives for a few minutes after he gets his check. Then he becomes another rich jerk who won't give us his stuff.
To a collectivist everything belongs to the government and your after tax wages are an allowance from a benevolent society. After all "you didn't build that business". They give the productive workers a little extra to keep their noses to the grindstone, not because the fruits of your labor belong to you.