• Jesus_666@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      My point exactly. The bet was about whether “tariff” and “tax” are synonymous. They aren’t synonymous if they describe different things, even if one of those things is a subset of the other. (This is complicated a bit by the fact that synonymity is context-dependent so in some contexts they can be synonymous. I’m assuming a general context.)

      To give a different example, every iPhone is a smartphone but not every smartphone is an iPhone. The two terms aren’t synonymous except in specific contexts like when discussing the inventory of an Apple store.

      In a general context, I would argue that the bet is lost – tariffs are taxes but taxes encompass more than just tariffs. The definition of synonymity is not fulfilled.

      The actual point of the bet, namely to illustrate that tariffs are paid by people in the country that raised them (because they are taxes on imported goods and services), remains valid.

      • null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        thesauris.com, merriam-webster, and collins all disagree with you.

        They aren’t synonymous if they describe different things

        This is clearly false. Obviously the degree of difference determines whether terms are synonymous. You’re correct that not all taxes are tariffs. Apparently however that doesn’t mean they’re not synonyms.

        Additionally one term being a subset of the other evidently does not preclude being a synonym.

        If you have a bet, and every dictionary says that you’re wrong, then you should just graciously pay up.