> Neoliberalism is not a school of economic thought. It's not an actual ideology that anyone associates themselves with. It's a word without any concrete meaning thrown around in order to avoid real discussion.

Then why do IMF economists refer to it as a real thing that the IMF actually practiced?

>The IMF itself is not a proponent of the free market. It exists precisely to support excess government spending and to bail rich bondholders who make donations to politicians. Nothing lassiez faire about that.

Then why is the IMF's usual advice to almost all countries to cut "excess" government spending on social programs while privatizing the kinds of revenue-making national resources/firms that keep the government from having to tax too much?