Okay, let me run something by you Mr. Capitalism.
If you have studied economics on a high end you would know about game theory. You would know about zero sum game theory and Nash's examination of scarcity competition.
I assume you haven't heard of any of this based on your other statements and will run down these concepts quickly.
Zero-sum game theory is basically treating everything as a competition where there is a winner and a loser and argues that you play to win even if your actions cause harm to you and your partners because if you don't assume the worst you will be left at a disadvantage. It's the backbone of most capitalist actions. It's used for everything from something simple like low balling offers to things more complicated like advertising and politics on every level. It's also used in scarcity- which is the concept that things can be scare or rare and finite- to determine a cutthroat profit maximization plan.
In short it is the doctrine of assuming you will have to fight for resources so you should maximize your strategy to win as much as you can and take the biggest piece of the pie.
Positive Sum game theory comes from the analysis of Economics that proved that when everyone fights over a finite resource, resources are wasted in the battle and those seeking the resources get in the way. There is a movie that describes this as if four guys in a bar all hit on the hottest girl there and make fools of each other trying to win her over to their side. The guy says what will happen is she will choose none of the guys and then when the four guys turn to her four friends they all will get rejected because they will see that the guys are just trying with them because they were shot down. He argued that the best strategy was to agree to ignore the hot one, each pick one girl and give them attention.
He was pointing out that a bit of planning and an agreement could cause all four guys to succeed. True no one would be with the hottest girl but they all would be with someone.
This theory was proven with the same math all the rest of your capitalism uses. This man created a mathematical model that illustrated that planning wastes less resources and is cheaper.
If you apply this to any part of capitalism it checks out. It also works in politics as well. If you stop treating everyone as an adversary and use planning you can cause better outcomes. This was discovered in the 60s. Yet capitalist don't follow it even though it's proven with the same math that they claim proves capitalism. Why?
Because they all want to be billionaires and have the hottest girl.
But if they didn't focus on zero game theory then we all would be better off.
If someone didn't take 7/8th the pie then the other four people wouldn't have to share a slice.
It's even worse because if you think about what the pie is… It's opportunity. A capitalist would argue that we need to take wealth from other countries to prosper. This is why wars are advocated for and capitalists outsource jobs. They want to take more pie from other people. And yes this is how this worked a long time ago before technology allowed land and resources to improve. Once upon a time you only got the same amount of food from land every year. We changed that by learning how to farm better. We had more workers too from improving medicine, and more productivity from learning how to make computers. We were basically creating more pie and more pie slices to go around.
See that's because we were creating opportunities and we were doing so by letting others learn and grow and investing in others. Now capitalist do this only when it fits into zero sum game, that is only when they stand to win. Positive sum game is built to purposefully focus on expanding. It's literally like deciding not to go after the hot girl again. Capitalist horde all the pie so they can buy anyone who creates more pie. They aren't aiming to give you anymore.
In fact the world economy grows tremendously whenever other nations are lifted up. The economy grows fastest when new technology is created because it's opportunity. New tech is created by scientists. If we spread the wealth around by letting all kids go to college for free, there would be more doctors, engineers, an scientists that would create things like cures, inventions, and theories that lead to more of both those great things. These things come from everywhere. Like how blood transfusions we're invented by a black American who actually died because they wouldn't admit him to a white only hospital when he needed help.
It goes further because it's proven kids that get poor nutrition at the beginning of their lives and in the womb grow up with stunted intelligence. So if we provided food to all kids and mothers that are expecting, more kids would graduate and go to college and a certain percentage would become Doctors. Can you see where I am going?
Capitalism argues that companies should get unlimited profit and be left alone by the government and that the people who provide the initial investments should get 99% of the pie or profit. In reality economics proved the best bet is to plan everything out in terms of not wasting resources. That we should ensure everyone gets an opportunity with good nutrition, plenty of time to study, healthcare to keep them alive, and free education and we should give that especially to the poorest people in the world even in other countries because they then become first world countries and they can buy goods and services as well as provide new technologies and advance all of humanity faster.
It becomes a runaway snowball of progress that creates more and more for everyone, if we just agree to do the opposite of what the capitalists say is best. By using the math they say proves their point but actually disproved their point 60 years ago.
In fact zero sum is basically the worst way to handle things and they insist it's the only way to handle things because that's how they make 100 billion dollars. They don't need it and yet they could already feed the entire world and do everything I said.
And if you think making everyone in the world better off than Americans means we will run out of resources… Well you are half right we will eventually… But we are already. Plus it's proven richer countries have less kids so it doesn't make the world worse and worse it just spreads the problem out equally across the surface of the Earth. And if everyone on Earth can potentially become a genius where they might have died or lived in war and poverty before, technology will get us to resources within asteroids and other planets faster if we do that.
If you think that with so much given to people they will stop working, you are wrong there as well. Unemployment rates in countries are not tied to things like free healthcare and such. Most people work in countries with the most services. They usually work less hours but the unemployment rates are comparable. The highest unemployment rates are in countries where exploration occurs. Places where capitalism is in full force because not everyone has jobs and the people who do are doing awful work for pennies a day and they can't buy anything but food. If they had food and education and everything, they would be able to buy the products made in America and all the other countries and that would lead to jobs everywhere.
They also argue zero sum in more than just the economy. They use it in politics to scare you into thinking that equal rights means less rights for you. They use it to scare you into voting for things that actively hurt you like more expensive health care and for laws that allow you to get fired easier. They use it to convince you that people are going to take your religion away and to convince you that gay people somehow make your lives worse because… Well they are different and for some reason you both can't be happy.
If you pay attention you will see that the zero sum people are the same people who want you to fall in line with a lot of “it's us or them” thinking. But whenever it is us or them, it's when in direct competition. The only time zero sum game makes sense is when you are playing a game like football. When it is the real world it's better when the most amount of people are succeeding. The capitalist know this and that's why they claim to be the ones that make jobs. They are lying to look like the ones that lift all ties. But every time they get their way and have less rules place on them, they cheat and steal more. Every time their taxes are lowered the economy gets worse for everyone but then. Every time they convince you that they are the good guys and someone else is the bad guys, those people aren't ever dealt with and yet they get whatever they want. Listen, when the zero sum candidate that said me me me, I'm the best it's their fault let's get them got elected…
Did welfare end? Did you all of a sudden make 3 times as much money? Did they keep their promises? Or did they just get richer way faster than you did? It's because they don't get rid of things that serve a purpose but they get rid of think that prevent themselves from getting wealthier.
Why didn't it become a paradise? If you think it's because the people without power in the Senate, the house, the supreme Court or the white house were somehow beholden to the people with no power…
It's because the zero sum people are in it to win it for themselves. Because as I said, their entire strategy is to play for it all and to defeat everyone else in a winner take all game. You are not them. You are not a capitalist. You do not have capital and you never will. If you want to prove it, try to invest into a start up. They won't even talk to you if you can't invest by the hundreds of millions. Because you don't have enough money to matter. That's where billionaires are made. You will never be wealthy because that means sharing the pie they they cannot share if they want to win.