that's an econ 101 concept that so badly misses the point, i'm not even sure it knows what the target is. and then a false dichotomy is tacked on to boot.
yes, if you are playing an ideal, rational, competitive economic game, one strategy is to "grow the pie" and as a result capture larger economic gains even if your proportion of the market remains the same (or even shrinks).
but when it comes to the real world, with all its complexity, we consider many more consequences than just the economic one (the profit motive).
to answer the false dichotomy (the last question), we care about both. we want fairness (not perfect equality) and we want less poverty. and yes, that's entirely possible and should be pursued rigorously and with singular focus.
yes, if you are playing an ideal, rational, competitive economic game, one strategy is to "grow the pie" and as a result capture larger economic gains even if your proportion of the market remains the same (or even shrinks).
but when it comes to the real world, with all its complexity, we consider many more consequences than just the economic one (the profit motive).
to answer the false dichotomy (the last question), we care about both. we want fairness (not perfect equality) and we want less poverty. and yes, that's entirely possible and should be pursued rigorously and with singular focus.