Brexit Bungle

[Dill]

(12-14-2018, 11:10 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yes.

No it didn't.  It solicited unnecessary exposition that any logical adult would not require.

It could be a fact, sure.  Any subjective based opinion could be factual.  In the absence of said facts we must, however, refer to the opinion as subjective.

Because your link did not contain the facts you allude to above.  Hence, their argument must be firmly identified as subjective until these facts are brought forth for consideration.  

Firmly identifying an argument as "subjective" doesn't firmly do anything here, if you are missing the point of the argument, likely misrecognizing premises AS the argument.

Fisher and Taub are not trying to prove that Britain is in an ideal time zone for trading, nor that the EU depends on British trade. They argue that many Brits exhibit an unfounded optimism about the British economy after Brexit. People may exhibit such optimism without "facts" or "links." And if they do, that they express optimism itself becomes a fact, even if their optimism is based on "opinion."

The only "facts" Fisher and Taub need at the moment to make their case is a sampling of statements to this effect by other Brits. They provide these. You have not said they made them up. Why would links be necessary? To what? To prove what?  If those statements proffered as evidence are "firmly subjective" then that increases the likelihood Fisher and Taub are right. And that their argument is not "subjective" in your sense.