You're still framing Marxism as a moral judgement on which kinds of labor are acceptable within the boundaries of Capitalism, to which I ask, what does this moral judgement accomplish? I can personally think it's cool to protect the little people against big corporations, but that's not in the realm of Marxism. Marxism is a tool, a tool for understanding the world around us and how we can best change it. Moralism and ethics are for courts and legal systems to hash out, Marxism is for liberating the working class.

It can be fun to watch the likes of Bezos and Musk clown on themselves and to watch them stumble and fall, and we don't need Marxism to tell us that that's okay. They are terrible people, and we know that with or without Marxism. Marxism isn't a cult of poverty either, it generally isn't better to be poor in Socialism than rich in Capitalism as a proletarian (not always true, though, as Capitalism continues to decay and crumble the safety of a Socialist system can outweigh having better access to commodities in Imperialist countries), and to reject wealth does not make one "noble." Dialectical Materialism is a toolbox and a magnifying glass, not a pair of legal scales to weigh one person's sins against the other.

The best answer to your question is to reject it, essentially.