>Here, I think, we have reached the root of the issue. You believe that the very identities of millions of Americans are wrong.

No, I believe it's wrong that government policy and macroeconomics should be shifted away from the norm for the sake of one particular cultural identity. Instead, I want it shifted so that everyone can live how they think they ought to, without markets compelling anyone.

The unfairness is in Bob getting his unprofitable coal-mining job subsidized while Alice the starving artist can't even get a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts, and of course Eve the Executive getting to exploit everyone else for her own profit.

I think he is saying, the world is changing, and everyone has to change with it. One of the things have to change is this old way of thinking about identity.

I agree!

I'm saying that lots of people don't want change, and telling them they must change is unlikely to be persuasive. In a democracy, this has practical consequences.

Many people desperately want to be artists. They may go to college and study Art. But the world only needs so many artists. So, if they don't have any other skill, these people inevitably find employment making a low wage in the service industry.

You're right! There are many people who want to be artists! There are many people who find happiness and fulfillment in nature, civil society, activism, music, and more. These people want these things desperately and they want to not have to work to do them.

You're completely right. There are lots of these people. I simply do not believe that this number is large enough to significantly alter the analysis I have offered.

Am I generalizing? Of course I'm generalizing. There's no other way to meaningfully talk about tens of millions of unique, special, individual human beings.