Well, if you have enough money, you can pay for someone else to work on X while you work on Y. In this way, you have been able to get 2 years worth of work done, in only 1 year. In effect, you doubled the number of years you had to spend on getting things done.
Spending money in exchange for someone else's work is a time multiplier on the one who spends the dollars. They get more done in less calendar time, i.e., because they effectively have more effort-time by converting their money to someone else's calendar time.
The entirety of my reasoning in predicated on one simple thing: an investor trades in their money for something of equal value, and the worker trades in their time for something of equal value.
This means, by definition, they are equal partners in the exchange, and hence must split the profits equally. It also means they each gained and lost equally, because they traded evenly.
If you do not agree with the foundational assumption I am making, point out the error in that, as all else necessarily follows.
But the employee keeps the money.
The entirety of my reasoning in predicated on one simple thing: an investor trades in their money for something of equal value, and the worker trades in their time for something of equal value.
Indeed. The investor buys part of the company, and the worker gets paid for their time.
If you buy shares in Microsoft you get a proportion of the company, not some weird "time" thing.
Person A is now at -100k: Agreed
Person B is now at 100k: Agreed
Person A is now at +1 years: If you are valuing 1 year at 100k, then no - they are at zero years. They put in $100K over 1 year, so the two cancel each other out.
Person B is now at -1 years: Again, they have been paid at the rate of $100K for 1 year, so they are at zero years.
Again - I reject this "losing a year" thing. The investor hasn't gained a year at all - you can't lose or gain time. But if you value 1 year at 100K then they have paid for 1 year, but that means they have by-passed other opportunities.
If they invest $100K in 2019 and the company goes bust in 2020 how have they gained a year?
But even ignoring that (!!) your math doesn't work.