Positive sum games increase wealth, satisfaction of neccesities or, in leftist terms, welfare. Zero sum games does not create nor destroy, but some zero sum games are unavoidables, while negative sum games destroy wealth, satisfaction or welfare.
- To permit positive sum games,
- To ban negative sum games and
- To ritualize/regulate zero sum games.
NOTE: Pareto optimum changes are positive sum games where no part is in worst position than before the game. Positive sum games must be considered in detail; Not all positive sum games guarantee that all players end up in a better position. For example, compulsory taxes are -theiewtically- positive sum games when applied to resourceful individuals to aid poor ones (because subjective gains in the second are theorétically greather than subjective losses in the first). But a lot of intermediate games are played between the exaction and the donation by other players that must be considered to extract the social consequences. Also, it is neccesary to consider the detriment on positive sumness produced by the exaction of money, that could have been used in alternative positive sum games that are Pareto optimums, such are the free market, free colaboration, familly care and even voluntary charity. It is also neccessary to consider the lack of involvement of the beneficiary of the welfare in positive sum games. This also impedes the corresponding creation of wealth.
To avoid eventual privileges kept by the rule of pareto optimum, a moral and politic toward the equality of opportunities is necessary. I confess that this post is just an first try. The whole thing has to be though further.