I'm pretty familiar with Seanchaidh's point of view. See last point below. I'm also familiar with Seanchaidh's willingness to skirt issues to mess with me.
Or maybe both of these are false.
You think that by virtue of offering someone a job, a person is robbing another of control of their destiny? That's how it works in your head?
Nope. That was already decided by virtue of the system they live in. Which I'm sure you'd understand if you bothered to consider even the simplest of the implications of what I've said.
So there is no compensation for ownership that you would not consider theft, correct? Any portion of the earnings granted to ownership as a result of ownership, no matter how small, is stolen value, by your analysis. Correct? Please tell the lovely audience that I correctly understand your position.
You're phrasing things ambiguously, so I can't tell if you do or not.
So for example:
I buy some land. Other people besides me want to use the land. I sell the land to the people who want to use it in an agreement which has a certain pay schedule or some other financial contraption with either a definite end date or a limit to the amount of compensation at which the agreement is considered complete; renting to own.
This is fine.
I buy some land. Other people besides me want to use the land. I let them use it in return for a share of their output for as long they use it, with no limit whatsoever and with no transfer of ownership such that I can stop them from using it at my discretion and go on to sell the land to someone else, or whatever else I want to do with it.
Where is the merit in that? What have I earned by doing nothing but having a title deed? Once I've received more than what I paid for the land (including any investment to improve it) plus reasonable interest or adjustment for inflation, why should I get more? If someone has paid me significantly more than the worth of the land for the privilege of using it, why shouldn't ownership transfer to them?
So if I get it write you would just get rid of equity? However, what about entrepreneur-owners? How do you determine the size of their initial investment? Purely on the cash they put out when setting up the company? Because I know entrepreneurs who started their company by investing little cash but a lot of time for little to no pay, this is often the case with "tech" startups where the value lies in the software developed. How do you determine the value of the "loan" which might mainly consist out of a year or more of development/R&D, sales, etc ?
There are many ways to deal with this. In the broadest terms, the company can negotiate extra compensation with the particular worker who put in that extra initial effort.