When you receive money based on an investment, that money represents value that was created as a result of another person's work.
People have the right to receive full payment equal to the value they create through their work.
Of course the investor has also does some work, in the sense of assembling the money for the investment, and maybe taking some risk.
So investment income in this sense could be considered a form of theft, as the investor receives wealth over which some other person also has a legitimate competing claim.
It's not 'evil' in the supernatural sense of the word. But at least by one way of looking at things, it is theft. Or at least we could say that the investor and the other value-creators both have legitimate competing claims over the wealth generated in this process.
When equal legitimate claims come into conflict in this way, force decides the outcome. In our system it is true that the money "earned" by investment is generally considered to be the new property of the investor. And government backs that up with the force of laws.
But there's no particular reason why it has to be that way, other than that it is the result of the power relationships that exist between workers and owners, or borrowers and lenders.
There is no particular reason why investors should receive any more money from their investment than would be equal to the value they created by assembling the money for the investment and the time they spend on it. In an alternative scenario, all the new extra value created could flow to other people participating in the process who have equal claims over it because they helped created it.
I hope that clears things up for you.
= new reply since forum marked as read
