It does "make sense" in that I am able to make sense of it. It doesn't make me think "WTF how is that possible".

Are you really wanting to ask "is it fair" or "is it just" or "is it good for society"?

Another way of thinking about this is marginal value. Imagine a world where person X has a heart attack and the next best person qualified to do their job steps in and paid their wage demands. The fall in social benefits less change in wages is their marginal contribution.

For Einstein, this is presumably astronomical.

For the best primary school teachers this will also be high (it might be low/negative for some of the worst).

These are not directly relevant to the question of whether the quant traders have a positive marginal contribution to society.

Don't first tackle something a bit easier on my behalf, but if you need to then we can.

Like the definition of value, which I asked you about above, whether something "makes sense" to me does not mean it will makes sense to you, and vice versa. I enjoy the chance to discuss and learn more about this stuff, but there is a ton of subjectivity here.

You seem to be saying value is intrinsically tied to money and how much money someone makes or how much money their estate is worth...?

That is not a priori true. And many examples where it appears value and money don't interact at all. One example sort of connected to what you asked: I am not a full-time kindergarten teacher like you brought up, but I do volunteer with an after-school math tutoring program. Now this is nothing to brag about or anything, just one person for a few hours a month playing a very small role helping students as they learn math. But this is volunteer work and I don't get any money for doing it - I don't even get a cookie or Capri sun like the kids sometimes get.

Does it make sense I am paid all of $0.00 for this time I spend volunteering helping students learning math?

So now let's just get to the real question you ask: does the market "reasonably and fairly compensate people" for work they are currently doing as well as for any future impact their previous work may have led to?

My opinion and my gut feeling is that in general no it doesn't.

But why would it?

So I'm not an expert with in-depth knowledge about every occupation and employee differences between them, and nobody knows the future or what future positive impacts someone's work may lead to. I also don't claim to have some specific set of target amounts in my head for what would be fair compensation for each respective type of work in the market...

The unfairness here is something I feel, but I know everyone's feelings and views on this topic will be unique. I have not come across a system that is objectively more fair. Have you?

I am not trying to play games, I really don't know.

So what system do you suggest would be more "fair" to everyone? and again how do you define providing value to society?