Here's the data: I see no losses

https://www.macrotrends.net/st...

'the climate debate is long over'

I suggest you get outside the bubble of the opinions you generally live within if you think that is true in the wider community, however much it might be within the science community. There are a lot of politicians playing up to the views of people who don't want to believe. Convincing them is a hard task, and every time something like this happens politicians who are happy to use the lie to gain power, will do better.

Have a long conversation with a salesman

Ask him about this feature

Inform him that it has lost him his sale

Rinse and repeat at another Subaru dealer

Climate sceptics are desperate to be able to reject the results from scientific studies because the conclusions demand actions that they don't want to take. Every time some story like this comes along, they are able to justify their rejections of other, better data.

There are no easy solutions to this problem. We need to be open to admitting errors - that's how science works! But every admission is very damaging...

'Negative effects? Quite limited'

Source please. There's a lot to suggest it's doing long term damage

Go and tidy your room

Yes, I know there are strange teenagers that have tidy rooms...

You're taking a very precise definition of 'neo-classical economics' which isn't what I was seeking to defend, so I understand your scepticism.

At university I had as my main text book Lipsey's 'Positive Economics', which was an attempt to introduce the basic concepts of economics that pretty much universally agreed. It's those concepts, which are, as much as anything can be proven, the 'scientific basis' for economics.

Just occasionally we get countries carrying out a strikingly new economic policy that allows us to see what happens. A recent example of this was Erdogan's refusal to raise interest rates despite rapidly rising inflation in Turkey. After several years of this, he finally returned to what every economist was telling him to do, and inflation is beginning to come under control

https://fortune.com/europe/202...

In Chile Pinochet's adoption of market economics after the coup against Allende lend to short term pain but long term gain, a pattern which was repeated when Poland emerged from socialism in the 1990s, creating what is now a dynamic economy.

Etc. etc. No doubt Bernanke did indulge in a degree of hubris in 2007; that doesn't mean that the central ideas of economics are flawed.

Noone argues that because medicine sometimes doesn't save every person from dying proves that medicine is a 'pseudo-scientific ideology'. The crazy success of China in seeing its economy grow from minimal to USA threatening is the result of its rulers adopting the principles of neo-classical economics, rejecting the idea that real development will happen any other way.

Go and read about the cycles of boom and bust in the 19th century. Those bought massive suffering to the people affected by them. We don't have those booms and busts any more - because we know a lot better how to run the economy to avoid them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

'That's not a given, it's an ideological position.'

Nah - it's a basic finding of economics; you know, the science that prevented the chaos of 2008 turning into a Depression like the 1930s.

Given that the economy works best without distortion, it is wise to have a lot of taxes with relatively low rates rather than a few with very high rates.

Given that drivers on private roads already pay fuel duty for the miles they drive on private roads, it makes sense for the replacement tax to be equally taxing such miles.

'Raine should never have been allowed to use the chatbot without parental consent.'

Yeah, right...