So, I'm sitting here grading essays where the students had to choose an economic policy and analyze its effects, discuss pros and cons, and say whether they support it or not.
One pattern I'm finding is that most students approach the policies from a supportive perspective. They explain all the intended consequences of the policy, and believing that the policy will achieve its intended consequences, they support it. They might pay lip service to opposition arguments, but they still tend to support it overall.
So, by doing this assignment, I don't think I'm training enough skeptics.
To the extent that economics is really about sifting through the bullshit and the claims and really thinking critically, I may change the assignment to, "Choose an economic policy and argue against it."
It's not that I want to force them to have a libertarian point of view... I just want them to learn to think more critically about claims that are made, and to learn to think more deeply, beyond the surface level first order effects of a policy.