Without wealth redistribution, we would all be slaving away as serfs in the fields of some feudal overlord. Don't fool yourself for a minute into thinking something else.
If you look at the US economic system, we do a lot of wealth transfer. Any country that is vaguely modern does wealth transfer. Wealth transfer means that not only the very few, very privileged manage to have some amount of free time and long-term security (that can be used to, say, invent things, which is what actually drives overall wealth).
There is not a fixed amount of work, because people can work both smarter and harder, when incentivized. However, there is a limited amount of physical wealth, as measured in tons of steel or similar hard resources. Thus, work and raw resources are not equivalent. However, I agree that wealth can and should be grown. It's just been shown over and over again in history that it's a large middle class that drives wealth growth, not the very few, very rich at the top. They're too busy fighting to retain what they've got, and "playing the game." The growth of an urban, middle class (basically, "intellectual" although at that time, more artisanal) is what dragged us out of the middle ages.
Oh, and by the way, I'll get this shot in early: libertarianism doesn't work, because it does not properly value societal risk. For example, I could run an unsafe underground toxic dump in my basement, which is right next door to your property, and you can't do anything about it as long as nothing bad happens. Then, I will save the money, and move to the Bahamas, and leave you to deal with the fall-out once the barrels start leaking. And even if you could get to me in the Bahamas, it doesn't save your property from already being contaminated. Preventing those kinds of problems is one of the things we have a government for. Further, libertarians want to press a big "reset button" on our current society, and then let people negotiate anew for rules for sharing roads, managing toxic waste dumps, etc. After a hundred or two hundred years, we'd probably end up with a common democracy system just like the one we have now -- libertarians just want to throw away the process we already went through to create the society we have, because they feel they will personally gain from the period of anarchy that comes right after the re-set.
If you're not a libertarian (although you sound like one), then so much the better.