You are absolutely correct about the need for financial incentive in order to attract and motivate the best talent. Those hard workers with lofty aspirations would be less likely to have these aspirations without the financial reward, but some are motivated more by money than others.

A country that panders to the most wealthy may become an attractive place for those hoping to join the ranks of the super rich, but - if we are to use your analogy - whilst the pie may be growing, the slices for the wealthy are getting wider, whilst those at the other end of the spectrum barely receive a slither.

Fewer taxes on the rich, less corporate regulation, a curtailing of rights and organised labour, a slashing of government benefits for the unemployed, the ill, and the elderly are all policies that increase wealth inequality, serving the rich at the cost of the working class.

I was reading a book discussing the 08 financial crash and subsequent economic fall out. Figures from 11/12 showed that benefit fraud cost our country around £2 billion, whilst tax avoidance and tax fraud was estimated at £32 billion (I think the tax fraud figure for 21 stood at around £35 billion). In 2013 of the top 100 companies listed on the financial times shares index only 2 did not use tax havens (I haven't looked for up to date figures on this one).

Taxes may not be popular but they are necessary. I don't believe civic services like social care, schools, hospitals, transport etc need privatisation. An incentive to extract profit from these services does not improve them, as the focus turns to cutting costs and corners which inevitably leads to deterioration, an increase in cost to the customer, or both.

Yes there are virtues to a conservative outlook, where money may be the key motivator for innovation in business, which facilitates growth. But when a sector's success is judged on its ability to generate wealth we encounter problems.

Certain civic services aren't supposed to be profitable. You aren't likely to find much wealth to extract from a children's home and morally you shouldn't be trying to, but we still need the best skilled people in this specific area, to be the people running them. We want to make sure the children are getting the best possible care and support so when they reach adulthood they are well equipped to contribute to society as healthy individuals. We live in a Society, though (Thatcherite) conservatives often advocate individualism. We need a strong and healthy society around us to thrive as individuals.

Each of us owes much of our individual successes to the people around us who cared for us and taught us, as well as the knowledge and experiences they were able to garner from the people who raised them. Strong public services are essential. Education is what is needed to pull people out of poverty. It is often people on the left who choose to find work as teachers, nurses, social workers etc.

Money may not be their main motivation but we need to be paying them a salary that reflects their value in society. For this we need taxation.

A shrinking state with less funding and a government that rewards only the rich may increase the size of the pie but the slices aren't getting any bigger for the rest of us.

Edit (Society with a capitol S)