is this reasoning fallacious [selfdestruction, selfmurder, evilmaking]? [pay for benefit?]?

Question

is this wrong?

'bill gates [bg] grew wealthy by making a LOT of things easier for a LOT of ppl - bg spends $20, sells for $100, saves ppl $1000s - that's value creation - you are rewarded for value you create for others'

shd we pay only for work [sacrifice of time & energy] or for benefit? is pay for anything but work, overpay/underpay? [= theft anger violence war crime unhappiness death]

[if we shd pay for benefit & we benefit by $1000s, shdnt we pay bg 1000s? [if we dont we are stealing] - but if we pay = the benefit we neutralise the benefit - so we cant pay fully for the benefit, so how much shd we pay for the benefit? only as much as the sacrifice [work] of the benefactor? whatever the market pays? the market pays for scarcity [unjust]as well as work [just]]
bg is paid for the temporary scarcity [ratio of demand to supply] shd bg be rewarded for high demand or low supply? the customers 'supply' the demand, not bg - society 'supplies' the low supply [new ind.] not bg

Answer 1

pay for benefit.