Quote from: tomcollins on July 08, 2011, 06:26:05 PM

Quote from: niemivh on July 08, 2011, 05:39:24 PM

Quote from: Atlas on July 07, 2011, 11:20:02 PM

Trading pokemon cards shouldn't constitute a contribution to "society".

Two people exchanging Pokeman cards are maximizing their utility, benefiting from the exchange. This results in a betterment for society as 2 people gained something at the expense of nobody else.

Quote from: Atlas on July 07, 2011, 11:20:02 PM

Everybody is not entitled to benefits from a transaction.

How you figure? Can you give me an example of two people involved in a 'transaction' in which one (or more) parties do not benefit? I think theft would be a good example, but can you think of anything else?

I think that an apple looks delicious. I buy it from a vendor. He benefits. Turns out the apple is rotten. The vendor did not know it. I do not benefit.

Good example.

Well you are knowingly engaging in a transaction with the vendor so that meets one of my earlier criteria. But did the vendor know that some of the apples were rotten? If so this is a clear cut case of the vendor being in the wrong as he would know that some person would eventually get a bad apple. If he didn't, then why shouldn't have he? It is his business to know the quality of his product, and it is truly in his better long-term interests to refund you to the money. But this scenario is hardly analogous to all transactions.