3 ms·

I don't see how I'm confusing the terms. Republican and Libertarian politicians will tell you that the carbon tax (and other forms of taxing externalities) is a

• AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  > my point was you can't, in good faith, claim "straw man" when someone uses the term that most non-economists in America use. The term for what you're doing is called weak man. It's finding some idiot or hypocrite in the world who is actually advancing the weak position so you can claim it isn't a straw man, and then knocking that down instead of addressing the stronger version being advanced by someone else. > I also never claimed that subsidies were a component of the free market nor did I claim any politicians think so. I believe that's an actual straw man :) That's an argument. If "free market" means what anybody who says they're for free markets says they want, that would imply that "free market" means oil subsidies. Which is clearly absurd, ergo so was your claim.
  • panopticon 6y ago
    > It's finding some idiot or hypocrite in the world who is actually advancing the weak position That doesn't really work when my argument is that it's the colloquial usage--not just a handful of "idiots". > If "free market" means what anybody who says they're for free markets says they want, that would imply that "free market" means oil subsidies. That's an absurd reduction, but that is how language works. This clearly isn't a productive conversation. Have a good evening.