The Story of Capitalism

Humans work in groups to accomplish tasks that they would otherwise not be able to do. Whether or not they do it for their own gains or for the gains of the group is irrelevant, the fact is, they choose to do it. We have computers, cars, large buildings, electricity grids, running water, etc., not because humans chose to work alone and for their own gain, but because they chose to work together for the betterment of the group as a whole. However, America breeds the idea of the individual making their way to the top, and Capitalism breeds competition. Put these two together, and you have the perfect mixture for the ruthless and greedy among the group to take control away from the others. Who builds our computers, cars, buildings, puts up power lines and lays down pipe for running water? The people at the bottom, the ones left behind. They're the ones still doing the job we value, the ones still working towards the betterment of the group. Who rose to the top, and is making several hundred times more than any of them? The one who decided to be the "executive", the person so far removed from the actual task, they have little to nothing to do with actually providing the service. They are businessmen; they make all the profit by making the wages of the group (the ones who are actually providing you with the essential service of the company) close to nothing. So, they get to take home millions of dollars, the people who actually provide the service live on welfare or in the lower class, and the group as a whole continues to suffer. Why does it continue to suffer? It needs those resources! There's only so much money that a person will need to live well, only so many millions of dollars before it just becomes excess. Wouldn't it be nice if a CEO who earned $40 million running a company of 12,000 last year had decided to split his check with the rest of the company and give them all a $3,000 bonus? I don't know of many wire-splitters or pipe-layers that would say they wouldn't want that check at the end of the year. The math for this still comes out to be a $4 million pay for the CEO, which is reasonable enough, considering no human being nor family of human beings actually needs $4 million, proven by the fact that there are families of workers within that company who would value the extra $3000! Sure my company is hypothetical, but it wouldn't be hard to find examples like this all over the country. There are just a few people who have propelled themselves to the top, and they seem to think the drastically large amounts they earn are justified while they leave behind those who are fulfilling the very services those at the top are getting paid so much to manage.

Is it reasonable that so executives make so much?
It is reasonable that some employees makes so little?