Example collocations logo

Neoliberal in sentence

153 examples of Neoliberal in a sentence

As the Brexit vote shows, Europe’s political class greatly underestimated the strains caused by free mobility across borders – a shibboleth of the failed neoliberal project of maximizing market-based resource allocation.
But, as the Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz has repeatedly pointed out, the neoliberal obsession with unfettered markets failed to account for the distributive costs of efficiency gains.
Though globalization has brought many benefits to the developing world, many object to the neoliberal economics that has guided its management.
The electoral successes of Bill Clinton in the US and Tony Blair in the United Kingdom had much to do with their deliberate tilts towards the pragmatic, neoliberal, business-friendly center.
Finally, policymakers must move beyond the neoliberal conceit that those who work hard and play by the rules are those who will rise.
Neoliberal economics has reached a breaking point, causing the traditional left-right political divide to be replaced by a different split: between those seeking forms of growth that are less inclined toward extreme concentration and those who want to end concentration by closing open markets and societies.
The neoliberal age had its day.
Two decades of applying neoliberal economic policies to the developing world have yielded disappointing results.
China, Vietnam, India: all three violated virtually every rule in the neoliberal guidebook, even as they moved in a more market-oriented direction.
Designing such a growth strategy is both harder and easier than implementing standard neoliberal policies.
After a year in the wilderness, wondering what would become of benign globalism and neoliberal ideas, Davos man had found a new North Star: pragmatism.
Just as Thatcher’s government was burying the Black Report and pretending that health inequalities didn’t exist (and, indeed, that “society” didn’t exist), it was also pursuing neoliberal economic policies without any evidence to support them.
“Pro-growth is pro-poor” has been the informal slogan of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund for decades, resulting in 35 years of neoliberal economic policies known as the “Washington Consensus.”
Prior to the neoliberal Reagan-Thatcher “revolution” of the 1980s, the economic consensus was that inequality and poverty were inherent to capitalism, and that a strong, well-financed government was needed to balance a market economy’s inevitable adverse effects on the distribution of income and wealth.
Starting in the 1980s, however, neoliberal economists began to dominate the discussion.
Even the most favorable analyses of the effect of neoliberal policies on poverty rely on an outdated definition of poverty: income of less than $1.25 per day.
Preventing bad current-account deficits would require far greater intervention in the private sector than the neoliberal and single-market doctrines that were fashionable at the euro’s founding would imply.
Mankiw’s standard description of outsourcing is very much like mine – indeed, like that of all neoclassical and neoliberal economists – and goes something like this:As with any change in technology that increases the volume of international trade in goods and services, the outsourcing of service-sector jobs creates winners and losers – but almost surely more and bigger winners than losers.
But, given the country’s strong neoliberal foundations, consistent market-friendly policies, and widespread support for moderate change, Bachelet will most likely change course only slightly.
This reflects a fundamental conflict between Thatcherism and Trumpism: the latter aims to sweep away the neoliberal consensus of unregulated markets, privatization, free trade, and immigration that comprised the former.
For starters, the global financial meltdown and subsequent recession laid bare the consequences of free-market fundamentalism, thereby undercutting popular and ideological support for the neoliberal view that markets are best at shaping societal outcomes.
In recent decades, the neoliberal order failed to deliver either condition, most likely because doing so would have been impossible even with the best policies in place.
But these presumed rights do not stem naturally from property rights and claims to scarce resources – the coins of the neoliberal realm.
It is surely no coincidence that the two biggest political shocks of the year – Brexit and the election of Trump – have come in the two countries that most fervently embraced neoliberal economics.
Its merit is its head-on challenge to the neoliberal obsession with deficits and debt reduction, and to reliance on quantitative easing as the sole – and now exhausted – demand-management tool.
It also partly reflects the neoliberal credentials of his economic team.
First, though, economic policymakers around the world will have to shake off the neoliberal paradigm, which has left them incapable of imagining alternative policy approaches.
Economists’ advocacy of neoliberal “Washington Consensus” policies and of financial globalization falls into this category.
For decades, neoliberal thinking had dominated economic policy.
Some crucial changes in the political economy of Western capitalism in the 1980’s can also be viewed in this light: the rise of neoliberal ideology, the growing inequality of wealth and incomes, the increase in structural unemployment, the growth of financial services, globalization, the invention of post-Cold War threats to sustain military spending, and so on.
BackNext