"The Prosperity Tree": Individual vs. Communal Rights, Capitalism & Monopolies

In a work of philosophical short story fiction, “The Prosperity Tree,” by Benjamin Walters, published in the literary magazine, “After Dinner Conversation, a harmonious village thrives through communal ownership of a single tree which provides everything (food, fibers for clothing, lumber) needed for life.
As all materials are freely available, labor is performed in exchange for other labor. There is no barter of goods or currency needed.
An adventurous villager, Caddison Brown, braving the dangers beyond the village, discovers a second tree outside the village fence. This tree is different (to the villagers, exotic) tree with different tasting fruits and grains; different fibers and colors; and lumber different superior in some ways. The major plot point occurs when the village Elders’ ruling grant him sole ownership.
Caddison gives surplus from his tree to friends who protect him while outside the village and help him carry back his wares.
Caddison’s ownership leads him to innovate with currency (dried purple flowers from his tree) and payment for labor.
The village slowly shifts from communal sharing to a market economy, in which the old tree is seen as “boring”.
Caddison then plants new trees, creating a prosperity plantation. With permission from the Elders, to whom he has been donating currency flowers, he diverts the stream to nourish his empire, killing the original communal tree and leading to widespread squalor, crime, and inequality.
Discussion Questions
At what point (if any) do you think is the first time things went wrong in the story? At what point (if any) should the village elders have stepped in to change rules or issue new laws?
Do property ownership and/or scarcity always cause inequality as in the story?
Is communal ownership the only solution to the creation of haves and have-nots?
Are the problems caused by the new Prosperity Tree due to its superiority/difference or that its ownership was not universal?
Does it matter which reason is the source of the issues?
Is currency a natural extension of scarcity and ownership?
Does the creation of a fungible currency in place of communal trade automatically create inequality?
Does Caddison deserve greater resources because he was willing to take the risks to find and cultivate the new tree?
Will Caddison’s success encourage others to venture to new areas outside the village to find yet another new tree species?