"I demand that it be this other way" isn't a branch of ethics either. And labeling some aspect of the existing way as "theft" doesn't make your argument any stronger. Neither does labeling it "narcistic psychopathy".
If we're going to live a better life than in the stone age, we need tools that are better than stones. The more sophisticated tools are beyond the ability of one person to both make and use them - they take too much time to make. So we wind up with a specialized economy where different people make the tools and use the tools. And they both deserve to be rewarded - the tools enable much more to be produced; those who made that possible deserve to share in the rewards.
But we're a money economy rather than a barter economy, because barter doesn't scale all that well. Well, in a money economy, if someone is going to use a tool they didn't build, then someone has to buy the tool - either the tool user or an investor. If the tool user doesn't have the money, then it has to be an investor.
Do you demand that the investor do so for free? That doesn't sound fair. (It also doesn't sound like it will actually happen - why should the investor invest if there is no expectation of a return?)
So now we have three people who need to share in the rewards - in tool maker, the tool user, and the tool buyer. And it is perfectly fair that all three share in the rewards. It is unfair to expect the investor to invest for free.
Like I said, we can have a conversation about the amounts that different ones receive. But that's a completely different conversation from "everything that goes to the investor is theft".
If we're going to live a better life than in the stone age, we need tools that are better than stones. The more sophisticated tools are beyond the ability of one person to both make and use them - they take too much time to make. So we wind up with a specialized economy where different people make the tools and use the tools. And they both deserve to be rewarded - the tools enable much more to be produced; those who made that possible deserve to share in the rewards.
But we're a money economy rather than a barter economy, because barter doesn't scale all that well. Well, in a money economy, if someone is going to use a tool they didn't build, then someone has to buy the tool - either the tool user or an investor. If the tool user doesn't have the money, then it has to be an investor.
Do you demand that the investor do so for free? That doesn't sound fair. (It also doesn't sound like it will actually happen - why should the investor invest if there is no expectation of a return?)
So now we have three people who need to share in the rewards - in tool maker, the tool user, and the tool buyer. And it is perfectly fair that all three share in the rewards. It is unfair to expect the investor to invest for free.
Like I said, we can have a conversation about the amounts that different ones receive. But that's a completely different conversation from "everything that goes to the investor is theft".