Btw I'm not arguing against the people that are in need and under-privileged, I totally get your point on that.
Lucky people often appear very capable (crazy bets that just happen to pay off look like skill to less statistically trained people), as do the politically skilled (if you can convince someone that you're capable, you don't actually have to be).
We use apparent "merit" as a proxy for aptitude, and that leads to a rich get richer effect, because merit, at the time of evaluation, is often inflated by overinvestment. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. In other words, I think there are a huge number of false negatives in our meritocracy games.
As a hiring manager, I've taken advantage of this for years. I look for proxies for potential, rather than present capability. That allows me to acquire underpriced, overlooked talent.