[laurent92]

Assuming it is a 0-sum game is a mistake. The rich can stay rich and yet other people can rise above, if we build more and more elaborated structures, and in fact, this is a goal. The 0-sum game only exists if we keep the same structures, science, tech, governance and social hierarchies.

About this, 86% of today’s billionaires didn’t have billionaire parents. The elites were surprisingly well renewed for our generation.

Some people would want the social elevator to work from -1 to +100 in one generation, this is unrealistic and wouldn’t even be wise because it takes a lot of knowledge to manage large groups of people. But if the top 40% can threaten the top 1% at each generation, and the bottom 60% threaten the top 40% in a single generation, then we’ve made it, we’ve given power to people who will need to keep working if they want to stay atop, and they’ll be accountable, and this is the important part.

[thomasahle]

> Assuming it is a 0-sum game is a mistake. The rich can stay rich and yet other people can rise above

Money is not 0-sum, but power is, and power is really the point of economic inequality.

So yes, right now some people have too little power in our society, and for them to rise, others have to fall (relatively speaking).

[ghufran_syed]

Could you please define what you mean by "power" and explain why it's zero-sum?

[newen]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(social_and_political)