4 ms·

In a capitalist economy, others doing well generally benefits you. It's not zero-sum.

viklove 7y ago
Sometimes you benefit from others doing well. Sometimes you are hurt by it. It's not as simple as you make it out to be. Globalization, for example, is zero-sum for many people. Since we're now buying <wheat/metal/electronics> from <x country>, people who did that here lost their jobs. It's absolutely a competition. In capitalism you have to fight for your right to feed yourself, and if you are in the bottom x% of society, you quite literally have to live on the streets.
- Mirioron 7y ago
  >Globalization, for example, is zero-sum for many people. Since we're now buying <wheat/metal/electronics> from <x country>, people who did that here lost their jobs. Considering that those are some of the hardest and most dangerous jobs, it probably is better for you that it's done somewhere else for cheaper. This means that everything that depends on those jobs, such as the price of food, will also be cheaper for you. You can learn another job and do that. I realize that many people don't really want to do that, but it is an improvement for society. >In capitalism you have to fight for your right to feed yourself, and if you are in the bottom x% of society, you quite literally have to live on the streets. This is true by definition, because if you are homeless then you're by definition poorer than somebody that is not homeless. Essentially, it's not an argument, but I do understand that there are poor people under capitalism, but they are much better off than poor people 100 years ago, and they're much better off than middle class people 150-200 years ago. Society, especially the US, is so rich that almost anyone has a supercomputer in their pocket. All western countries offer lots of support for the homeless and poor.
mtnGoat 7y ago
not sure i agree on that, a good capitalist will try to own everything he can... how does that help anyone but himself?
- Mirioron 7y ago
  Because the way they would have to do it is by offering people something even better in return. In a voluntary trade both sides end up better off, because both sides get something they want more than what they give away.

Sometimes you benefit from others doing well. Sometimes you are hurt by it. It's not as simple as you make it out to be. Globalization, for example, is zero-sum for many people. Since we're now buying <wheat/metal/electronics> from <x country>, people who did that here lost their jobs. It's absolutely a competition. In capitalism you have to fight for your right to feed yourself, and if you are in the bottom x% of society, you quite literally have to live on the streets.

Mirioron 7y ago
>Globalization, for example, is zero-sum for many people. Since we're now buying <wheat/metal/electronics> from <x country>, people who did that here lost their jobs. Considering that those are some of the hardest and most dangerous jobs, it probably is better for you that it's done somewhere else for cheaper. This means that everything that depends on those jobs, such as the price of food, will also be cheaper for you. You can learn another job and do that. I realize that many people don't really want to do that, but it is an improvement for society. >In capitalism you have to fight for your right to feed yourself, and if you are in the bottom x% of society, you quite literally have to live on the streets. This is true by definition, because if you are homeless then you're by definition poorer than somebody that is not homeless. Essentially, it's not an argument, but I do understand that there are poor people under capitalism, but they are much better off than poor people 100 years ago, and they're much better off than middle class people 150-200 years ago. Society, especially the US, is so rich that almost anyone has a supercomputer in their pocket. All western countries offer lots of support for the homeless and poor.

mtnGoat 7y ago

not sure i agree on that, a good capitalist will try to own everything he can... how does that help anyone but himself?

Mirioron 7y ago
Because the way they would have to do it is by offering people something even better in return. In a voluntary trade both sides end up better off, because both sides get something they want more than what they give away.