Thanks for the pre-school analogy, but I still think it is wrong for one person to control 100b dollars of assets/wealth. Someone being a founder doesn't really translate to any meaningful explanation of why they should have this much power.
Not to say I agree or disagree with you, but I believe you're talking about different things.
1. Did he do work worth 100b usd?
2. Should this mean he controls 100b dollars of assets/wealth and/or have this much power.
I'd actually state 2 more specifically- should having control of 100b dollars give someone so much power
(3. An alternative point that many people state: should people who have much less than the average have such poor lives in comparison to what is achievable.)
I probably fall on different answers to the above questions than you, but I think it's helpful to separate out the various different statements that are being made here, at least as I see it.
