are these sound selfinterest reasons for not [self]glorifying brains over brawn, managers over managed?

Question

1] pay shd be for sacrifice/loss, the main sacr. is time [energy sacrifice differences in work are small] - no one can work more than twice the average time of work/wk - there is no reason to assume brains work longer hrs than brawn
2] isnt it like giving the brain more oxygen & blood bc it is a superior organ? - ie, both brain & muscle are indispensable to the body - starving the muscles is only making the brain hit the floor
3] while it is easy for brain to swallow that brain deserves more pay, it is hard for muscle to swallow: eg, an historical pattern of backlash is apparent in cultural revolutions, nazi anti-intellectualism [40% of nazis were primaryschool teachers], trashing of plutocracies
4] it is attributing all the goodness of the tree to the seed [ignoring soil water air sun world]
eg of glorification: 'one person who creates organisation that provides benefits to millions/ worker who simply follows the rules/orders/plans'
one person cannot create an organisation

Answer 1

The analogy is false.

Brain and managers are paid more than brawn and managed because of their relative scarcity.

Answer 2

this sounds like something i would have written when i would get high!!! intriguingly smart and i like the way that you put it but of course this is common sence.