John Locke and the Unequal Distribution of Wealth Essay example -- Empi

It is stated by tin can Locke that in the state of nature no man may lead more then he can consume. make use of whatso incessantly advantage of life before it spoilswhatever is beyond this is more than his division and belongs to others. Nothing was made by God for man to spoil or destroy. (Locke 14) Locke then goes on to say, God gave the world to man for their benefit and the great conveniences of life they were capable to draw from it, it cannot be supposed he meant it should always remain common and uncultivated. He gave it to the use of the industrious and rational- and restriction was to be his title (Lock 15) Both of statements can stand al wholeness, each could be argued. For starters, it is not only selfish to take more then you ever will be able to use, it is just stupid, and if you make it with your sweat, why shouldnt it be yours to keep or profit from. The only problem is, that one of these statements is the head of a starving serpent, and the other its delicious tale. It is hard to swear the head could stay alive without devouring the tale. We should start this argument at the head and work our way down.If John Locke were alive today he would be a lawyer. Not just any lawyer though, a big business lawyer working for a company the likes of Enron. He would try to justify the destruction caused by excessively rich, overly powerful people, with statements such as ones that will follow. When first reading Locke you competency think, Hey, this guy sounds like a lawyer....