During my Anthropology studies, I became acquainted with the theory of “limited Good”. The concept was novel to me, no doubt, because of my youth. But it is fascinating in its explanation of why Capitalism comes under attack, and why Communism has so much appeal.  If we move away from this primitive concept that there is only “so much” to go around, and bring to bear the concept that  rather than limited wealth, there is unlimited potential for wealth, we may be able to end class warfare. Keep in mind that Over 23% of all the goods and services made since 1AD were produced from 2001 to 2010.”  A rising tide can indeed lift all boats.

The term limited good is a concept from anthropology describing the theory commonly held in traditional societies, that there is a limited amount of “good” to go around. In other words, the amount of good luck, money, etc. available is held to be finite, so every time one person profits, another loses. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_good

Redistribution of accumulated wealth may be necessary to keep the peace in tribal and feudal villages. However, the social stigma against accumulation of wealth can be detrimental to economic development when a society is capable of increasing the level of per capita production. Unfortunately, the Theory of Limited Good continues to be a very powerful myth in modernizing societies, and is often the prevailing paradigm in countries just beginning the development process.

The term was coined by George M. Foster in his 1965 article, Peasant Society and the Image of Limited Good, “American Anthropologist.” The concept has been described by Allen as the rural counterpart of the culture of poverty. The Mexican peasants (in Tzintzuntzan, Michoacán) Foster studied were seen by him to lack interest in new opportunities because of their perception of the world as a “competitive game.” This led to a high level of distrust and envy and fragile and constantly shifting patterns of alignment. ^{[1]  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_good}  From 2000 years of History, a great time to live

The chart below is from The Economist and shows a “population-weighted history of the past two millennia” based on “economic output” and “years lived.”  According to The Economist:

Over 23% of all the goods and services made since 1AD were produced from 2001 to 2010.” 

MP: It also looks like more economic output was produced in the 20th century than in the previous 19 centuries combined

 Click on graph to enlarge.

Here is a wonderful piece on “limited good” fromThe Logical Middle. The full post is long, but is well worth the time. He goes on to explain why we had the economic explosion in the last centuries:

The amount of goods on this earth appeared to be strictly limited. One tribe could garner a larger amount of goods only by taking it away from some other tribe; one group or family in a community could improve their position only by appropriating resources from, or enslaving, other groups or families. Feudal societies existed in Europe and Asia for centuries with no perceptible long-term change in the per capita level of living from generation to generation. The share of the population that was relatively well-off—mostly the nobility, military, priesthood, and a small cadre of artisans and tradesmen—was always limited to about ten percent of the total because it was not possible to extract a larger share of the food supply from the majority peasant farmer population through tribute or taxation. Peasant farmers in feudal societies, and people in hunter-gatherer societies, had little incentive to produce more food than they could consume when there was very little of value that could be obtained for that food through trade. In feudal and tribal societies, the vast majority of people had no reason to even consider increasing production above that required to maintain life. The amount of goods on this earth appeared to be strictly limited. One tribe could garner a larger amount of goods only by taking it away from some other tribe; one group or family in a community could improve their position only by appropriating resources from, or enslaving, other groups or families.More at The Logical Middle