4 ms·

I think you're confusing zero-sum between people at different economic levels and zero-sum between people at different points in time. Yes, people at a given e

I think you're confusing zero-sum between people at different economic levels and zero-sum between people at different points in time. Yes, people at a given economic percentile today have many things better in absolute terms compared to poor people at that same economic percentile X years ago. (This is obviously true for large enough X. Everyone's got it better today than the Cro-Magnons did!) That does not mean the present system is not zero-sum in its relative distribution of wealth among people today. Every dollar in a billionaire's bank account is a dollar that could be in someone else's instead.

gretch 3y ago
> Every dollar in a billionaire's bank account is a dollar that could be in someone else's instead. This is not an example. Today the government can print more dollars out of thin air. So no, dollars is not zero-sum. Even then, dollars is only an approximation of value, the thing that really matters. And value is also not zero-sum because of technological innovation and the existence of waste. If we are smarter about how apply our resources, literally more people can have more, and no one has to lose. (One example is people in the US simultaneously being food insecure while the nation also has tremendous food waste).
creato 3y ago
> Every dollar in a billionaire's bank account is a dollar that could be in someone else's instead. This is true, but billionaires don't just have a billion dollars sitting in bank accounts. The billions in wealth comes from ownership of property and companies. Some of this may be considered "zero sum" in the way you describe (e.g. a billionaire that owns and rents out single family homes). However, I would guess the majority of that wealth is not "zero sum" in the way you describe, such as a warehouse robot (or the warehouse itself). What are you going to do with a warehouse robot? It has no value to you, or almost anyone else.

gretch 3y ago

> Every dollar in a billionaire's bank account is a dollar that could be in someone else's instead. This is not an example. Today the government can print more dollars out of thin air. So no, dollars is not zero-sum. Even then, dollars is only an approximation of value, the thing that really matters. And value is also not zero-sum because of technological innovation and the existence of waste. If we are smarter about how apply our resources, literally more people can have more, and no one has to lose. (One example is people in the US simultaneously being food insecure while the nation also has tremendous food waste).

creato 3y ago

> Every dollar in a billionaire's bank account is a dollar that could be in someone else's instead. This is true, but billionaires don't just have a billion dollars sitting in bank accounts. The billions in wealth comes from ownership of property and companies. Some of this may be considered "zero sum" in the way you describe (e.g. a billionaire that owns and rents out single family homes). However, I would guess the majority of that wealth is not "zero sum" in the way you describe, such as a warehouse robot (or the warehouse itself). What are you going to do with a warehouse robot? It has no value to you, or almost anyone else.