@jackm I don’t see enough on those particular sources to actually show appropriate methodology, or even a definition of “charity”. But if it makes you feel better, touche, you got me.
But this notion that economics is not a zero sum game, a rising tide lifts all boats, etc. doesn’t matter when people are hungry while others are wealthy beyond comprehension. That’s why income taxes in this country from their inception until 1981 were heavily progressive. Because for decades we saw the rich get richer while the poor worked long grueling hours and died hungry and cold.
The classic definition of economics is: “the science which studies human behaviour as a relationship between ends and scarce means which have alternative uses” source. Go ask any professor of economics, conservative, liberal, or something else if that definition is accurate. I’m betting they’ll all agree that it is accurate. Here’s the thing, the key word is scarce. Economics is all about scarcity, money is all about scarcity. The reason that economics is a zero sum game (or close enough to it) is that there is always going to be scarcity, you can “create” all the wealth you want, but all you will get is inflation. The things people want and need remain scarce, and the accumulation of wealth by a few will still lead to poverty for more.