No. But if you are a shoe-maker who employs 10 people to make shoes, and you pay them less than their skills are worth or take money for yourself beyond what is required to run the business, you are taking their money.
If you get a machine to make the shoes and fire the workers, and continue to charge me the same price for the shoes which now cost you less to make, now you are taking my money.
How do we determine what someone's skills are 'worth'? You seem to be espousing something called the Labor Theory of Value. The labor theory of value has a ton of problems, that you can read about here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_the_labour_theor...
Almost no economists believe it in anymore, although it was popular a long time ago. It just isn't consistent with a lot of real world problems.
> If you get a machine to make the shoes and fire the workers, and continue to charge me the same price for the shoes which now cost you less to make, now you are taking my money.
How, exactly? Are you entitled to my shoes at their marginal cost of production? Where in that interaction does the 'taking' happen?
If I am a shoe maker and I make one shoe per day, and you invent a new process that makes 10 shoes per day, and my customers start buying shoes from you instead of me, have you "taken" my money? What about all the value you've created for your customers? Economists call this factor a 'consumer surplus', and it's much larger than the amount that I have lost, so the net wealth creation in the world is positive when you invent your 10-shoes-per-day process.