Wanted to give the same critical emphasis to the economic theory explanation as you had given to the socioeconomic class interest bit. The statement articulate

Wanted to give the same critical emphasis to the economic theory explanation as you had given to the socioeconomic class interest bit. The statement articulated two "parts" of the explanation. The second "part" was phrased as a matter of class self-interest, with a critical tone. But the phrasing of the first, as being "from" economic theories, can very easily be read as giving those theories a pass, esp. in environments like HN. If we wanted to explain with some finality, we might answer, "why do we mandate lead shielding around radioisotopes" by saying the reason is "from physical and biochemical theories [about harm from ionizing your DNA]." Or we might answer, "why are some traits observed to be epigenetic / both heritable and environmental" by saying the reason is "from biological theories." The appeal to science-y authority is pretty conversation-ending in technically-oriented conversation venues like HN, I find. Or more properly, it might not end conversations but it makes that piece a leaf node. I just like to remind people that economic theories are far, far more than their hard-science counterparts, political products.