Quote Originally Posted by Husar View Post
I'd say the biggest issue with many "championing the individual"-approaches is that they seem to end up championing a few individuals while most individuals are collectively screwed. It sounds good in theory or if you're part of a priviliged collective of individuals, but fails in practice, much like certain ideologies on the extremely collective end.
Economics is not a "fixed pie." Were it to be, then you can ONLY view capitalism as slavery and extortion of the many by the few. This is one of the implicit and flawed assumptions that undercuts the otherwise useful critique of capitalism proffered by Marx & Engels.

Economics is an expanding (and occasionally contracting but over the long haul expanding) pie. Thus the fortunes of most may hope of improvement over time.

To take advantage of these changes, numerous systems have developed over time. The West, having discarded autocratic/and oligarchic approaches [though not their lingering effects] has moved towards one of two macro "choices" for tapping into economic growth over time: equality of outcome and equality of opportunity.

I do not believe that equality of outcome can be achieved, though admittedly a noble goal in many ways, because individuals seeking to better the lot of themselves and their closest companions will seek to game any system to advantage. By contrast, I believe that striving for equality of opportunity faces fewer flaws -- though I acknowledge that this can never be perfected either. I view it as less bad.