Libertarianism and Redistribution of Wealth

Libertarians claim that it is unjust to redistribute wealth through taxation in order to provide services to the poor based on the idea that it violates the fundamental right of liberty; the right to do whatever we want with the things we own, provided we respect other people’s rights to do the same. The problem with this argument is in the phrase “things we own”. To own something is to assume that you are fully entitled to it and owe nothing to any other party for the privilege of that ownership. The libertarian claim that any money gained though employment or business is money that they are fully entitled to is false, therefore the claim that the redistribution of that wealth through taxation is a form of theft is also false based on the grounds that no one fully owns all of their wealth. The reason that no one fully owns all of their wealth is that we live in a society where many aspects of our economy that contribute to the generation of wealth are paid for by society as a whole. An example of this is a child who goes to school. This child will graduate knowing how to read, write, do math, use computers, etcetera. These are all skills required both for them to have income and for future employers to profit from. These skills allow employers to hire them knowing that they can have a basic level of expectation of this child, and even if they are not employed, business owners can also assume a basic level of expectation in the ability to use the products being sold.
To clarify, let’s look at an example using Bill Gates, one of the richest men in the world. Bill Gates would never have become wealthy if he did not have the basic expectation that the majority of people in America had the education and knowledge to use computers. He did not pay for this knowledge, society as a whole did. The fact that society is responsible for educating our people to the basic level required for the use of Bill Gates’ products is the reason why Bill Gates does not