I am no scholar of Locke, but I would imagine that he would — as a classical liberal — be quite opposed to any overhead control of property. The value is in the individual owning the property.

And I do not think that the difference between the government owning property and hedgefund companies owning property is significant enough to make Locke disagree with his central premise concerning the right to own property.

In this case, the hedgefunds would act as “the government” — overseers who abuse the populace for personal gain.

But other Locke scholars can help out here and correct me if I am wrong.

Thank you for the comment and for furthering the conversation!