Okay, thanks. The broken window just doesn't strike me as a central part of the broken window fallacy. To me, the important part is that people see the glazier

Okay, thanks. The broken window just doesn't strike me as a central part of the broken window fallacy. To me, the important part is that people see the glazier getting money in exchange for a service, and think that economics is happening and this is a good thing; but they don't see that if the glazier didn't get that money, the bookseller would. So I'd say that yeah, zizee is committing the broken window fallacy, even if the broken window itself has no analogous component in vis reasoning. (But I'm not going to argue about it if you continue to disagree. That would be a profoundly boring argument.)