to think all points are not equal

[drwitch]

Example: "Greggs sausage rolls are disgusting" = (your view, I disagree with it but we are just different.
"Greggs sausage rolls should be taxed at 200% because they are so unhealthy"- I disagree with you and may try to change your mind but fully accept that yours is a legitimate position
"Greggs sausage rolls contain traces of sperm" - This is matter of fact not opinion and I think I am right to point out that this is very likely wrong

Its the same in politics, when poster A says incomes will be higher after Brexit and poster B says they will be significantly lower, because the evidence is overwhelming in support of poster B, poster B is right to bang on and on in support of her view. It is not a simple difference of opinion it is a difference of fact

Andy Hamilton reckons we've moved into an era of post-factual politics. I can't see any reason to disagree, which is depressing.
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/culture/2016/oct/09/andy-hamilton-fantasists-have-taken-over

Except there isn't overwhelming evidence in support of b, just hypothesis . Please show me your evidence.

Well, I love a Greggs sausage roll and I'm not going to be put off by a mere trace of sperm.

I get the concept you're talking about (not informed enough RE Brexit to weigh in on the evidence / hypothesis debste) and wholeheartedly agree with you. Is there anything more paralysingly passive aggressive than a 'we'll just have to agree to disagree' when the issue is one of fact, not opinion?

this is me, there have been so many threads and posts giving the evidence. Basically most economists predict that brexit will reduce incomes (LSE model, the treasury, The IFS ....) The ones that don't (e.g. Minford) compare being in the EU with a world where the UK unilaterally removes any tariff barriers. They assume that other countries will follow suit but even if they don't the UK will gain from lower prices. There are two points to make here. First the Minford model has embedded many ic assumptions about how people view the future (rational expectations) and about the non importance of setting a common regulatatory framework for trade. Second even if the Minford assumptions were correct - do you think his world is what the brexiteers were actually voting for

a casual
yes Happy do you think we need a MN reality checker?

Predictions aren't really evidence.

There is no evidence that I'm aware of that salaries will be lower. Predictions, models - sure, but no evidence, and by its very definition, a prediction is not certain.

It would be like saying I predict there is sperm in sausage rolls, which is then an opinion again.

I can observe (or taste) the sperm in one sausage roll or all that I sample. I can't then make a generalisation about all sausage rolls (including those yet to be made) without making a prediction. I base this on the sample that I have tasted and my knowledge of the activity of the male workers in the factories.

I can't observe what will happen after Brexit but I can make a prediction based on what happened to countries after they joined the EU, the link between trade and incomes and the effect trade barriers (monetary and other) on trade. Its the same thing

Is it possible to impregnate oneself with a Greggs sausage roll?

I suppose it brings a new meaning to 'One in the oven'.

Ask 100 economists for an opinion, and you'll get 100 different answers all of them wrong in one way or another

Ask 100 economists for an opinion, and you'll get 100 different answers

At the moment it seems rather, ask 100 economists for an opinion, and you'll get 99 the same and one different.

yes drspouse Its very like climate change -the overwhelming majority of scientists are of one mind.

The 100 opinions for 100 (or even 50 economists) comes from the fact that there are often many mechanisms as play and we disagree about which one is more important. Here there is only really one. Trade. Trade increases incomes so anything that makes trade harder will reduce them