May my arguments always be C's.
Arnold King compares the kinds of arguments you can reply to and the kind you can't -- specifically Paul Krugman's.
[Y]ou are teaching by example that making speculative assessments of one's opponent's motives is more important than thinking through the consequences of policy options. If everyone were to use such speculative assessments as the basis for forming their opinions, then there would be no room for economics in public policy discussions.Highly recommended for anyone whose head has ever come close to exploding when reading an editorial that doesn't address the merits of the issue on the table.
Posted by Matt at October 7, 2003 12:19 PM
