Social Darwinism and the Flaw of NeoConservative thought

Social Darwinism is the notion that competition, whether it be economic, athletic, etc... leads to a superior and more refined mankind. In other words, by struggling to defeat one another in terms of business, religion, sports, education, etc... we sharpen our sensibilities in ways that might not occur otherwise.
Putting aside the arguement that competition actually refines mankind in a positive way -- I will leave that for subsequent posts -- I would like to focus instead upon an aspect of Social Darwinism that I feel has negatively impacted our world.
It seems to me that most Neocons have reached the conclusion that economic success is an indicator of individual character. In other words, in their minds, one who possesses great wealth is, in most cases, morally superior to one who is less wealthy. This also affects their view of intellect. It would not be uncommon to hear a neocon spouting George Bernard Shaw's line from Man and Superman (and I quote it correctly) "He who can does, he who cannot teaches". Neocon Social Darwinists would interpret this line to indicate that some are suitable for real work, while others can only manage what they might regard as low paying women's work. They would also add the insult of mentally assuming a degree of moral superiority that accompanies the ability to do really important work rather than somewhat less important work. The importance of the work, and degree of moral correctness are, of course, determined by the income one makes.

Switching gears, lets look for a minute at the problems of health care and the average salaries of some individuals within that industry. An average doctor in Amarillo earns 109,000 dollars a year. A good salary. Doctors should be well paid. The same doctor in Canada earns about 98,000 a year, still pretty good. If doctors in both country average about the same pay, then why is health care so much more expensive here. Lets look at some other salaries that factor into our health care dollar. Here in Amarillo, the average Medical Insurance Salesman makes a whopping average salary of 188,000 dollars per year, quite a bit more than the doctor. In Canada...well I couldn't find a figure, because in their system no one has to sell insurance, it's simply provided. What about Pharmacuetical sales? The average salary of a salesperson working for one of the big drug firms is a whopping 254,000 dollars a year, over twice as much as a doctor makes. Why aren't Republicans screaming for profound changes in our medical industry?
I believe the answer is Social Darwinism. Neocons instinctively believe that anyone who makes a large salary must have some degree of moral rectitude. While I agree that God does bless his followers, I don't think his blessings take form of salaries that serve to harm the poor. His blessing are there so we have enough...so our needs are met...so our thoughts can be on him and not on our empty stomachs.
In my opinion God doesn't bless us with profits beyond our wildest imaginings. God doesn't give us houseboats and lavish vacations to sex clubs in the Bahamas where we can hang out with the likes of Rush Limbaugh (his penchant for Caribbean adult resorts is well documented).

I'm sick to death of the notion that the rich are somehow morally superior, harder working, and generally better people than the poor. When one reads the numerous warnings of the dangers of wealth found in the bible, and when one sees the relative poverty of Christ's life, one can only conclude that Social Darwinism and the notion that wealth equals righteousness are false idols that an entire political party has focused upon.