Thanks for the reply. So, out of compassion for the next "I", we try to accumulate good kamma in this present "I"? However the separation or distinction from one another of the two "I" is problematic in terms of how kamma and rebirth relate to moral justice. According to Bikkhu Bodhi :
"It is obvious that moral justice cannot be found within the limits of a single life. Immoral people might enjoy happiness and success, while people who lead lives of high integrity are bowed down beneath pain and misery. For the principle of moral equilibrium to work, some type of survival beyond the present life is required. Two different forms of survival are possible: an eternal afterlife in heaven/hell or a sequence of rebirths. Of these two, the hypothesis of rebirth seems far more compatible with moral justice than an eternal afterlife; for any finite good action, it seems, must eventually exhaust its potency, and no finite bad action, no matter how bad, should warrant eternal damnation." from Does Rebirth Make Sense?
Where is moral justice if the present "I" is distinct and different from the "I" to be reborn? An immoral or moral "I" will just breakdown into the aggregates and then the aggregates will then produce another "I". Even if the karmic seeds of morality or immorality gets transmitted in the aggregates, we can still see that the present and reborn "I" are distinct from one another. If this is the case, moral justice and kammic consequence does not or cannot extend beyond one's lifetime. But we still see some bad people being better off relative to some good doers, til their deaths. From what I can infer, rebirth and kamma, as it relates to moral justice can only be significant if the "I" being reborn is literally the same as the present "I". But this is not how rebirth is in Buddhism