Raw materials are less limited than most people think. The usual scenario is that as a raw material gets scarcer, the price for it goes up. With the price higher, firms are incentivized to spend more on technology to reach formerly unreachable raw resources, etc. This is why we've been running out of oil for about 100 years - the price goes up, technology is deployed, etc. And if we really did start to run out of oil, then the value of energy would go up creating demand for alternates as the price now pays for greater technological breakthroughs, etc.
So, to make a long story short, the idea that resources are a zero-sum game is also incorrect in the sense that the underlying value can be found given enough ingenuity unleashed with the profit motive.
So the lego example is in no way a reflection of the real world, and if I could give this blog post a larger up vote, I would.
Would you be happier to say that the utilisation of raw materials 'tends towards' a zero-sum game, then? ;-)
I don't disagree with what you say (although I would argue the likelihood of this theory playing out in practice and over the long term seems low), however this is largely irrelevant to my original point which was that many people who aren't successful (by some measure) will complain that inequities 'in the system' are unfair, and much discussion will ensue because of that.
The global uranium reserves with mining costs up to US $ 80 per kilogram amount to about 2 million tonnes ... If mining costs of up to 130 $/kg are taken into consideration the global uranium reserves are increased by further 3 million tonnes.
At some price, it will become possible to extract trace uranium from ocean water, of which there is quite a bit.
So, to make a long story short, the idea that resources are a zero-sum game is also incorrect in the sense that the underlying value can be found given enough ingenuity unleashed with the profit motive.
So the lego example is in no way a reflection of the real world, and if I could give this blog post a larger up vote, I would.