>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.