Hello Dr. Sachs, I was wondering if you could respond briefly to a few questions I have had for awhile. I was in the military and deployed overseas when I read the Shock Doctrine and could verify everything that she claimed when I was in the Middle East. I have since been discharged and I pursued an Economics degree during which I took an Economic Development course. In the course, we reviewed your new and refined writings/theories and I had also wished to ask you these questions:
1) What is your retort to what Naomi Klein so succinctly documented about Free Market reforms and the subsequent repression to maintain them the world over. “The idea is to get the guys heart beating again. And it’s a bloody mess. But you don’t have any choice.” Do you still hold to this rational?
2) In your revamped understanding, you state that it is immoral to experiment because you would be withholding funds from a given population, but how do you reconcile this as an academic who is trying to solve poverty without the faintest idea of what works because of a lack of data? Secondly, do you not see that the big push is a logical fallacy if the only reason as to why it could fail is from there not being enough?
joshnr139 karma
Hello Dr. Sachs, I was wondering if you could respond briefly to a few questions I have had for awhile. I was in the military and deployed overseas when I read the Shock Doctrine and could verify everything that she claimed when I was in the Middle East. I have since been discharged and I pursued an Economics degree during which I took an Economic Development course. In the course, we reviewed your new and refined writings/theories and I had also wished to ask you these questions: 1) What is your retort to what Naomi Klein so succinctly documented about Free Market reforms and the subsequent repression to maintain them the world over. “The idea is to get the guys heart beating again. And it’s a bloody mess. But you don’t have any choice.” Do you still hold to this rational? 2) In your revamped understanding, you state that it is immoral to experiment because you would be withholding funds from a given population, but how do you reconcile this as an academic who is trying to solve poverty without the faintest idea of what works because of a lack of data? Secondly, do you not see that the big push is a logical fallacy if the only reason as to why it could fail is from there not being enough?
View HistoryShare Link