I think it’s unfair to say that it’s “lazy.” Neo Marxists understand the way those factors affect impact economics but because they’re very difficult to quantify in a heavily quantitative focused academic environment you’ll see less focus upon it, even when analyzing standard fare free market capitalism. I consider it a double standard to put burdens of analysis more upon one ideology than another. Sociology and religion are already highly qualitative disciplines by nature of the limits of science and our known physical reality (eg. we can’t time travel let alone reliably) and the kind of advantages systems like feudalism, monarchism, mercantilism, etc. work with authoritarian centralized systems is consistent across many societies including why some cultures tend toward syncretism and why others reject certain tenets and customs. The Nordics weren’t Christian, after all, and they absorbed it much more than American indigenous while Black Americans have very different relationships to Christianity than African blacks such as in Somalia and Ethiopia - this isn’t the wheelhouse of economists typically in academics but various humanities departments unrelated to business. Those influences and trends usually get labeled under the standard generic realities of imperialism given so much orchestrated power influences societies en masse while most bottom up movements against these structures tend to come from humanities focused areas away from economic interests like the arts, but this is why the Soviet Union and even China suppressed these freedoms because of the tendency to cause discord and dissent in a precarious society. As such, most leftist literature, especially outside academia (already an institution that must exist within the confines of a funding society), sounds predominantly like they’re criticizing basically every dominant human social construct, which is where the ideological position is cornered. This isn’t to say that I agree with this kind of discourse either because it doesn’t convince people beholden to these dominant constructs.

Nope. It's merit. Jobs, Musk, Bezos, Buffet, all exceptionally hard workers and risk takers.

Saving 20% of your income and regularly investing it is the path to decent wealth for about everyone. See "The Millionaire Next Door".

https://www.amazon.com/Millionaire-Next-Door-Surprising-Amer...

BTW, a couple years ago, I was being driven home from the car repair shop after I dropped my car off. I struck up a conversation with the driver, who turned out to be a refugee from Afghanistan. He had come to the US a year previously with nothing but the clothes on his back. He got a job, saved his money, bought a car and started a car service. He was telling me all about his plans to expand his business.

The fellow was already well on his way to becoming wealthy.