Imaging a world of 100 traders each with $1, the most any trader can profit is $99 at the expense of the others. Trading is often regarded as a zero sum game, a dog eat dog world of winners and losers, where speculators are searching for an edge over the others.

But is this really what trading is in a global economy or is it too simplistic?

An economy has multiple elements so you can't take one part in isolation.

Traders do actually provide value. By taking on risk that others wish to shed, they earn a premium that compensates them for providing that capacity. Their activity can improve price discovery and tighten spreads, benefiting everyone.

Market makers and high‑frequency firms continuously post bids and asks, allowing other participants to enter or exit positions quickly and at fair prices. Their compensation (the bid‑ask spread) reflects the service they provide, not a pure transfer of wealth.

Long‑term investors (e.g., pension funds, index funds) channel savings into productive businesses. When a company raises capital and expands, the economy grows, creating jobs and additional wealth that benefits many people—not just the trader who bought the stock.

Hedgers (farmers, manufacturers, airlines) use markets to lock in prices and protect against adverse moves. They pay a cost (the hedge premium) but gain certainty, which can be socially valuable even if the counterparties earn that premium.

When you aggregate all participants—speculators, hedgers, arbitrageurs, liquidity providers—the overall market can be positive‑sum because it improves price discovery, reduces transaction costs, and supports efficient capital formation. The “losses” incurred by speculators are often offset by the gains of hedgers who avoided larger real‑world risks.