|
|
|
|
|
|
by golergka
3192 days ago
|
|
|
> It's often not a zero-sum game, and often the popular perception of it in zero-sum terms is vastly overblown. It's never zero-sum, and it's never full cooperative either. > I can not think of any scenario where I would want something done that would benefit my close relatives at the expense of people in other countries. Imagine that your close relative loses a job, and his, hm... "standard of living" goes down X, while someone else on another side of the globe gets that job, and his standard of living goes up 2X. (It's not zero sum, yes). Would you be happy over such an outcome? |
|
|
Why did they lose their job? Is it because of freer trade? If was something like that then I would be ok, because I think that ultimately that's likely to make things better for everyone including the people in my country and including my relatives and descendants.
(and why does helping your relative out have to be at the expense of those other people overseas? Perhaps the best way to help them is for them to receive funding to get retrained to be more competitive in another area?)
I'm against the idea of blocking things with long-term gain, for the purposes of short-term gain.