Neither speaker expresses an opinion. They tell us about certain factors they think are relevant to compensation. But whether we can make reliable and consistent calculations about compensation amounts is not discussed.

This is not a point of disagreement. Davis agrees that value matters for determining compensation, and there’s no evidence Higuchi disagrees that value matters.

Not a point of disagreement. Davis agrees and thinks harm should be measured by the value of the property. We can’t say Higuchi disagrees. He may want other factors included in how we measure harm, but there’s no evidence he thinks compensation shouldn’t be based on harm.

This is a point of disagreement. Davis thinks time of deprivation shouldn’t be a factor in compensation; only value of the property matters. Higuchi thinks time of deprivation should be a factor in compensation.

Not a point of disagreement. Both speakers advocate for a general rule for calculating compensation. They may disagree about specific factors that should be part of that rule, but they both advocate for a rule.