a Lockean argument for the redistribution of wealth.

According to Locke, value is created by an agent when he engages upon labor; the sweat of his brow, so to speak, when combined with his intention, spawns ownership and merit. Furthermore, from God’s eye view of the universe, the merit ascribed to agent engaged in intentional labor is proportional to how much intention and labor the agent causes. Thus, the more intense the labor for the body and the soul the more merit is bestowed (from God’s point of view) and the more merit ought to be bestowed (from our point of view); hence it’s a natural right of all men to be both able to work and to be compensated for it.

Enter Economy.

Everything previously mentioned should be qualified to some extent. The type of labor proceeding from a given agent is relevant too. An agent who digs a ditch for no particular reason and to no particular benefit of his peers is instancing both intention (I suppose) as well as hard work; but we naturally would deem his efforts as misguided and idle (and God would, I think, agree with us). Hence his efforts should not be rewarded by himself (in the form of satisfaction) nor by us; there are greater goods that can be had with the same effort.

In this country this schema is fundamental; so fundamental, I might add, it goes without saying. We reward Bill Gates because his labor, so we have perceived anyway, benefited us. If you ever scoff at how much money he has you can thank only yourself. Bill Gates is Rich because we made him that way.

So here’s my somewhat Lockean argument for the need of some type of the redistribution of wealth. Bill Gates, despite his effort and genius, could not have benefited us in the way we think he has without the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people who produced the things he developed. If everyone who makes that production possible stopped doing what they have in fact done, then we wouldn’t have computers and Bill Gates wouldn’t be a multi-billionaire. Since everyone who labored to bring us computers are essential to bringing us computers, then those people ought to be rewarded appropriately, and that would mean the a huge hunk of what Microsoft owners enjoy is not theirs to enjoy. There should be corporate salary caps, and at least 70% of a given companies' profit should be sent back to the production line.