> the principle that money makes more money (the principle of investment and ROI), and I don't see how "competitive market" tackles this. It doesn't address th

> the principle that money makes more money (the principle of investment and ROI), and I don't see how "competitive market" tackles this. It doesn't address that because it doesn't make that argument, in that way. One of its starting axioms is that economy is a positive sum game. In the case of your statement, it might argue that (in the very general sense) money makes more money in a positive sum way -- more total wealth in the economy. Then to the latter it merely says that business that are better at making money (and generally, wealth) get to out compete those that don't. Its premise is it optimizes for wealth creation of the entire economy. I think that's the place to take the argument -- either that you fundamentally disagree with that premise or some outcome of it. > It basically feels like the capitalism starts off from fairly-level playing field Historically I don't think so. I"m not expert but read a lot and I'm currently under the impression that economies were historically locked down by government or tightly coupled government / mercantile entities.