The investor is not the least bit worse off. He gains what the worker loses, and the worker gains what the investor loses. The worker gains the 100k, but the investor gains the extra year of work.
That is, the investor, effectively, gets 2x the time they otherwise would have, because they traded some of their money for someone else's time.
Whereas the worker has now lost 1 year, though they did gain 100k for the time they spent.
If you do not believe that the investor is trading their 100k for something of equal value, then please demonstrate this. For it is this equality that underpins my argument.
Saying the investor "has nothing" is naive, since, as with others, you are ignoring what they traded their dollars for.
That is, the investor, effectively, gets 2x the time they otherwise would have, because they traded some of their money for someone else's time.
Whereas the worker has now lost 1 year, though they did gain 100k for the time they spent.
If you do not believe that the investor is trading their 100k for something of equal value, then please demonstrate this. For it is this equality that underpins my argument.
Saying the investor "has nothing" is naive, since, as with others, you are ignoring what they traded their dollars for.