I'm def gonna steal the crystal example, it's exactly how this disingenuous bullshit works.
Also, if you want to have some fun at the expense of economists: *that* one paper by Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson, the one where they purpot to empirically prove their istitutionalist theory, uses a ranking of "ease of doing business" as a proxy for inclusive institutions. In this ranking, the Soviet Union is in the top 5. (source: Glaeser, la Porta, Zingales, "Do institutions cause growth")
Thank you! This was truly educational. Does the logical fallacy of mixing reasonable with controversial antecedents, and then using the reasonableness of the consequent as evidence for the controversial antecedents have a name? I did a perfunctory search through logical fallacies; the only one that struck any chord of similarity was the Motte and Bailey paradox--a mixing of the easy and difficult--but the form didn't seem right.
The part of your discussion about economic freedom brought Thomas Piketty's book, Capital, to mind, as well as the Gini coefficient, rentier capitalism, and the discussion of which kinds of taxation are just or unjust. I would guess that the folks in the Heritage Foundation are among those who insist on calling inheritance tax a "death tax".
I'm def gonna steal the crystal example, it's exactly how this disingenuous bullshit works.
Also, if you want to have some fun at the expense of economists: *that* one paper by Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson, the one where they purpot to empirically prove their istitutionalist theory, uses a ranking of "ease of doing business" as a proxy for inclusive institutions. In this ranking, the Soviet Union is in the top 5. (source: Glaeser, la Porta, Zingales, "Do institutions cause growth")
Thank you! This was truly educational. Does the logical fallacy of mixing reasonable with controversial antecedents, and then using the reasonableness of the consequent as evidence for the controversial antecedents have a name? I did a perfunctory search through logical fallacies; the only one that struck any chord of similarity was the Motte and Bailey paradox--a mixing of the easy and difficult--but the form didn't seem right.
The part of your discussion about economic freedom brought Thomas Piketty's book, Capital, to mind, as well as the Gini coefficient, rentier capitalism, and the discussion of which kinds of taxation are just or unjust. I would guess that the folks in the Heritage Foundation are among those who insist on calling inheritance tax a "death tax".