Very well said, Compassion is to be replaced with pragmatism. Very dangerous stuff.

@Gordon Bradley Hello. In Germany flexible labour markets mean: Reducing state labor laws, for example, less protection against dismissal, temporary: temporary workers have fewer rights and are paid less .....than the normal employees. If you don´t know about the relation between workers and companies speak with normal workers.

Andi Jack Hello. That's exactly what " a flexible labour force " means everywhere. No rights ! No security! Dogs wages ! Bosses behaving like tyrants. Huge profits and bonuses on the backs of the peoples poverty and misery. They cannot stop until they have taken everything !

The "gig economy" sounds kind of sexy and free and entrepreneurial until you find out it's just a euphemism for per diem wage slavery with no security or benefits.

@@syzygy21055 Amen .

There's an explanation for Hayek's ideas: he escaped Austria when his family was persecuted by the Nazis. Hayek tried to create a system that avoided the concentration of power on politician's hands - like happened in Germany. If that is a moral argument I really don't know. What is really strange is how, given the evidence, people still believe in neo-liberalism - a model as failed as communism.

@@maxheadrom3088 as failed as communism, is it?

@@Barklord Thanks for reference. I have read Whyte's book yet. Will check it out.

He is right in the sense that the real issue is not whether the state has a role in a capitalist economy and that it is not a matter of size. Capitalism without thale state would have never existed and would collapse . In reality ,it is a question of what does the state actually do , what is its perpusive function. Social democracy ( the old one moreso but also the more modern one that moved to the right) used the state to exclude spheres of the economy from commodification.( Health, education etc.Neoliberalism expanded this sphere of commodification to boost falling profits and facilitate new markets for capital. It moreover crushed organised labor and advocated for freeing the labor market, through this individualistic market idea of freedom. It was generally ,a move for marketization of society in a polanyian sense.Also ,in the case if finance , neolibralism meant more regulation ( more legislation, more complex one )but of the kind that facilitated speculation, risk taking and large profits ( analogous to risk taking). He is right in criticism of the author but he told us nothing about the devastating effects of those policies. Wage stagnation, productivity delinked from real wages, small anemic growth in the long run( especially compared with the post war era) , debt bubbles and inequality skyrocketing.

you mean mesmerizing and no its not

+psusac The second guy too. Clever people, but unfortunately not well presented.

the first guy is supposed to be a barrister, too. One I wouldn't hire; not yet, at least. Barristers need to be good performers, actors. Let's hope he gets better as he grows up..

these are no "intellectuals" these are apologists for the rich. Apologists of 1) destruction of society, 2) destruction of state, 3) destruction of the planet. These are apologists for the destruction of everything people hold dear, all for a small fee.

There is in Pennington’s account some interesting follow ups on Basel accords effect on financial regulations.