I just given you you can't know whether that distribution it's just or unjust. you can't know just by looking at a pattern or a distribution or a result whether it's just or unjust you have to know how it came to be you can't just look at the end state or the result you have to look at two principles the first he calls justice in acquisition or in initial holdings and what that means simply is did people get the things they use to make their money fairly so we need to know was there justice in the initial holdings, did they steal the land or the factory or the goods that enabled them to make all that money? if not, if they were entitled to whatever it was that enabled them to gather the wealth the first principle is met. the second principle is did the distribution arise from the operation of free consent people buying and trading on the market as you can see the libertarian idea of justice corresponds to a free market conception of justice provided people got what they used fairly didn't steal it and provided the distribution results from the free choice of individuals' buying and selling things the distribution is just and it's not it's unjust. so let's, in order to fix ideas for this discussion, take an actual example who's wealthiest person in the united states, wealthiest person in the world 