Reddit mentions of Economics (McGraw-Hill Economics) 18th Edition

>Sure, so long as saying that an exchange can be mutually beneficial but not necessarily without a clear "winner" and clear "loser". Even if one benefits one can do so while at the same time reaping much fewer and much more insignificant benefits as their contractual partner.

If it is mutually beneficial, it simply is beneficial for both parties. If the opportunity cost is already taken into account, there really is no loser. Thinking otherwise is basically nothing more than jealousy or envy. Even if one of the traders benefits more, it doesn't change the fact that you are better off than before, too. (Not to mention that the trader who benefits more is almost certain to face competition that will balance the exchange rates. But let's not get sidetracked.)

>If each party only ever partakes in activities where equal values are being exchanged, then where does profit come from?

"Equal values" is a tricky phrase. For a simple example, assume you are good at baking cakes, and your friend is good at fixing bicycles. You have a broken bicycle, and your friend's birthday is approaching. If you fix your own bike, and your friend bakes his own cake, it takes three hours for you both. If you exchange services, the end result is the same, but it only takes one hour. You both saved two hours, which is a net profit.

>If excess value is being extracted from the exchange by one or more parties, then where does this value come from?

In the cake/bike example, it came from the efficient use of resources. Your friend who was skilled in bike fixing got to use his skills. As I've emphasized before, life is not a zero-sum game. Value can be created.

>By "reading and book on economics" what do you mean?

I felt like there were some basic but important issues that you weren't aware of, which were derailing the conversation. The major issue was the non-zero-sum nature of economics. I was also distressed by the context where you mentioned inflation a few posts back, and your question about the reasons for playing poker. To me, these simply looked like the usual mistakes people make before taking a basic economics course or reading a low-level book on the subject.

I did not have any specific book in mind, as I suppose most introductory books contain similar material. McGraw-Hill Economics is a safe bet.