>>This then leads to a situation in which many people do not have access to natural resources with which to make their own living and therefore their only choic

>>This then leads to a situation in which many people do not have access to natural resources with which to make their own living and therefore their only choice is to work for people who do have those resources. In that sense their state of being employed by others instead of themselves is not voluntary. People would have to work even if all land was divided equally across all people. Furthermore, there's no fundamental reason why every person born deserves to share equally in all natural resources. The act of being born does not add value to the world. A family can have 10 children per generation and massively increase the share of natural resources they control under your moral code. Finally, even if someone's share of natural resources is unfairly small, it doesn't follow that the person offering a job is violating their rights by offering one that doesn't meet some minimum standard. If you want to make a case that someone is being unfairly denied natural resources, then that should be the issue dealt with, by gathering evidence and proving the case in a court of law. The alleged injustuce shouldn't be used as a flimsy excuse to restrict other people's rights.