Today, my thoughts turned to an (admittedly) small part of game theory.

I thought about the zero sum game.

I realized that much of how you perceive the world, how you perceive wealth, inequality, first- and other world countries, rich and poor is dependent on whether you think that global wealth is a zero sum or a non zero sum game.

In other words, do you believe that there is one cake, and whenever my piece is getting bigger, someone else's is getting smaller, or do you believe that the cake is able to grow? And why should that matter?

It does, because if you believe the first one, you believe that the wealthy, the ones who get ahead in life, as they say, do so at the expense of others, since there is only a limited amount of wealth available. If this is you, you might think that (forcefully) redistributing the wealth of the world might be a viable option.

If you in camp two, however, you probably believe that wealth is not redistributed, but created. That it is actually possible for all to have more, for all to prosper, without redistribution. That by having a proper understanding of the world, and behaving oneself in a matter that is “right”, prosperity can happen for everyone.

While these few words do not do the difficult topic justice, I feel that the second option is probably right.

I believe wealth can be created and that wealth is not a zero sum game.