Daniel Lyons: Counterarguments can be meaningful

Lum3n/via Pexels

Published: 01-13-2025 9:57 PM

In their Jan. 4 columns, both writers Joe Silverman [“Climate in the court of public opinion”] and Sarena Neyman [“Killing sparked long-overdue dialogue about greed. We need to keep talking”] seem to think that if they had better messaging campaigns, their policy proposals would be widely accepted. If only others had the proper understanding, we could finally make progress on fixing these problems. But isn’t it possible that many do understand the authors’ conclusory views on taxes, wealth, and climate change and simply disagree with them?

Ms. Neyman seems to think that economic wealth is a zero-sum game. If someone is “super-rich” or under the yoke of “corporate greed,” this explains “stagnant wages, failing schools, a burning planet, [and] unaffordable housing.”

But could some think it is acceptable for a company to earn a profit (“corporate greed”) if it provides a product or service that makes life better, easier, or more enjoyable where the transaction is voluntary without coercion or fraud? (Even if the founders retire early and travel the world in their yachts and Gulfstream jets.) C

ould the Federal Reserve’s interest rate policies or asset purchases possibly contribute to the ”gangbuster stock market?” Ms. Neyman writes she does not want to destroy capitalism or the free market but wants a “healthy balance” between the free market and government protection, though does not specify what this balance would entail. This statement seems at odds with the rest of the column, given her dislike of billionaires and the implication that profit is evil. For the record, I think Taylor Swift should be able to keep what she’s earned.

Mr. Silverman’s views on the causes and perils of climate change are well-known and often appear in the Daily Hampshire Gazette. But could it be that some have concerns about the uncertainties associated with making long-term projections, think the cost of implementing changes is too high, or think anything we do at a local, state, or national level won’t materially change long-term temperature forecasts?

By all means, let’s keep talking. Not everyone with a counterargument is a corporate shill or is looking to exploit the masses, and communication is more than repeatedly hearing someone’s conclusions.

Daniel Lyons

Florence

Article continues after...

Yesterday's Most Read Articles

Weed grower suing neighbor Nourse Farms for $17M over pesticide drift that ruined crops
River Valley Co-op denies Jewish Voice for Peace request to set up info table at Northampton, Easthampton stores
Change on march in sleepy Florence: New developments stir optimism, worries
20 dispensaries statewide found to have products with mold, including in Pioneer Valley
Amherst town worker hired to take minutes says council violating Open Meeting Law
Plains Elementary in South Hadley changing name to Henry J Skala School