You're the first person to bring "no return" into this conversation. I specifically advocated smaller return, and called out that no-return is counterproductive.
Which is to say you are arguing against the point neither me nor lifeisstillgood were making, the point you made up yourself.
Your comment capped it at 2x the wealth of a typical worker - so then once someone has achieved 2x the wealth of a typical worker, wouldn't any additional work be for no return?
And it's "typical" not "maximum". If a typical capitalist is 100 times richer than the typical worker, and workers outnumber capitalists 1000:1, then 90% of the of all wealth (and thus economic power) is with the workers, yet capitalists still have their incentive to work their hardest - some of them will only be 10x, and some 200x of the baseline. The key is that in this scheme capitalists are all competing with each other for the same slice of the wealth pie, instead of competing against the workers, as they do today.
Which is to say you are arguing against the point neither me nor lifeisstillgood were making, the point you made up yourself.