alt Hacker News> So you're back to to "fallacy" of market efficiency, expecting private actors to advocate to foot taxes with an expected ROI from capturing the value delivered
Or I'm pointing to the existence of arguments that fall outside of your paradigm of reasoning through direct economic self interest.
I'd guess the flip flopping you're feeling here comes from trying to shoehorn my argument into your paradigm, and it not fitting. The resulting logical contradiction does not imply an error in my argument, but rather the inapplicability of the paradigm you're attempting to use.
>The resulting logical contradiction does not imply an error in my argument, but rather the inapplicability of the paradigm you're attempting to use.
This is a diabolical level of gaslighting to present your logical contradiction as my fault. Perhaps the "shoehorning" you're finding is in fact a function of forcing your reasoning into the premise of appeal to economic value to which I responded while simultaneously damning my response in a way that created a contradiction in your logic.
>>Can you think of any economically valuable reason why it might be important to know about weather trends or events in advance? Any at all?
The whole premise of this was appeal to the economic interest of constituents of the people ending the program.
If you want to pretend like we're addressing an entirely different "argument" in whatever la-la land is existing in your mind right now, so that you can seriously make your statement, I'm not particularly interested in addressing your hallucinatory fantasies. Have a good one.