Ignoring inheritance...
They're not being "punished". As stated, if you have 80 apples, you lose far less so far as your needs (which are all anyone is entitled to...your wants you have to earn/deserve/whatever) go if you lose 40 apples than I do if I lose 10.
Similarly, the premise that the rich "worked for it" has one fatal flaw.
It is part of the capitalism system to assume that those who are, in a word, worthy, will prosper. Those who work hard, are smart, ruthless, ambitious, capable, whatever, will prosper.
The problem is that it is not true. Plenty of talented people die in poverty not because they lack ability but because the system is set up so as to give great riches to a few who figure out how to (ab)use the system, rather than to reward those who are capable of producing something (for purposes of this statement, being an effective middleman does count as providing a service.)
So, if the amount necessary to live comfortably (the equivalant of $100,000-500,000...I'm a Californian, so I use this sum. Adjust for how less overpriced your state is.) is 13 apples, you are still well above that if you lose half your apples, which can be used to help those who are less fortunate. Meanwhile, I'm 3 apples short if I lose half my apples.
The apple metaphor doesn't begin to cover how much is needed to cover governmental costs, such as roads (which benefit all, social security and such being justified is a seperate arguement), and as stated, those with most of the wealth should be taxed accordingly.