Likewise there's a big difference between forcefully inserting yourself as a necessary catalyst (aka, a middleman), and meaningfully improving someone's life.
It's the difference between someone who INVENTS a medication, and someone who collects 5% fee any time you PURCHASE the medicine. Sure, the pharmacists might go on and on about how they are helping people, but really it's the chemists that are doing the hard work that ultimately are the ones improving your life.
While the dude who invents the drug that saves my life is doing far greater work than the dude who makes it possible for me to buy that drug at the pharmacy two blocks away, they're both doing good work, and both a net gain to the world. Why disrespect either?
There are genuinely useless, parasitic, and net-negative people out there, but none of the proposed examples (bankers, pharmacists, Google) falls into this category.
No it isn't, both are equally necessary for your life to be improved. You may consider inventing more prestigious and you could argue that it improves more peoples lives but some hypothetical scientist who simply invented a bunch of stuff in his basement that was never distributed would have as little impact on the world as anyone.
It's the difference between someone who INVENTS a medication, and someone who collects 5% fee any time you PURCHASE the medicine. Sure, the pharmacists might go on and on about how they are helping people, but really it's the chemists that are doing the hard work that ultimately are the ones improving your life.