The main argument that the bourgeoisie use to excuse their theft of surplus value is that they purchased the means of production and took a risk in doing so. Completely ignoring whether or not that alone justifies taking the lion's share of the proletariat's labor, they're correct that the means of production is important. Without it, no one could produce. However, staking your claim to the surplus value of the proletariat on ownership of the MoP is a dangerous decision. Why? Because it makes you disposable. You see, it's not the bourgeoisie who is important, it's the MoP. Sure, the bourgeoisie own the MoP, but they can easily be replaced while leaving it unchanged. Replaced by whom? Well, the proletariat of course! If the proletariat seizes the MoP, they can produce without providing a cut of their labor to anyone but themselves. The bourgeoisie will have no argument to make as to why they are owed surplus value because they would no longer own the MoP. That is what seizing the means of production is all about: keeping the fruits of the common man's labor out of the hands of middlemen and parasites