Whether any particular person makes a naive argument depends on the details of that argument, so I&#x27;m not going to delve into that further without a specific example.<p>I want to defend the general point though, that &quot;If people are making a general class of error in some context, then that class should be pointed out, even if not everyone in that context makes that error.&quot; You&#x27;re right: some people do go far enough to (dubiously) make a case about how eg surge pricing reduces availability. These arguments are the exception, not the norm, and people should be made aware of the more general, mistaken point.<p>And for what it&#x27;s worth, I most certainly do try to find these &quot;they&#x27;re making it strictly worse than had they not intervened&quot; arguments, but the popular expositions never make them. The fact that &quot;oh, someone else makes arguments somewhere that aren&#x27;t crappy&quot; is no defense, and it does not improve the debate to let bad arguments linger because you prefer they be equated with better ones (which really just confuses things). If someone makes an error, that error should be corrected, whether or not there&#x27;s an argument for the same conclusion that doesn&#x27;t.<p>You really don&#x27;t have to go far to find a protectionist argument that&#x27;s 100% &quot;dey took are jerbs&quot; and 0% &quot;this is not the optimal tariff defined in the literature.&quot;