2 ms·
you are neglecting the difference between zero and positive sum in your examples. using a club is zero sum, because (as implied by the article) it doesn't reduc
by leetcrew 8y ago
you are neglecting the difference between zero and positive sum in your examples. using a club is zero sum, because (as implied by the article) it doesn't reduce the global rate of car theft, so you are merely shifting the burden to other car owners.
you are right that most areas of life are competitive, but the examples you provided are probably not zero sum. when you get educated, you don't just increase your leverage to take more out of a fixed size econonic pie; you marginally increase the size of the pie with your skills. increasing your physical fitness means less burden on health services. everyone you interact with has a more pleasant day when you aren't filthy.
- peeters 8y ago> it doesn't reduce the global rate of car theft, so you are merely shifting the burden to other car owners. Article's anecdote aside, there'd be no reason to believe it wouldn't also reduce global theft rate. Theft requires opportunity, and if the club means that global opportunity goes down, the global theft rate would follow. e.g. at the very least there might be some occasions where the car with the Club is the only car available to steal at the time.
- leetcrew 8y agoyeah this occurred to me too, but i just decided to assume the article was correct to illustrate my greater point. the punchline of the article is to suggest that the club actually increases the local risk of theft anyway.