"Savages" feels like overkill (at least he didn't "slam"), i honestly don't find this very compelling. The second half more or less just lists some currently p

"Savages" feels like overkill (at least he didn't "slam"), i honestly don't find this very compelling. The second half more or less just lists some currently popular views. There is very little argument for them. They might very well be right, but whether they are right or not isn't so interesting as why they might be right or wrong. The most compelling part i think was the argument that power's distorting effect on markets is not well enough understood. That seems plausible to me (albeit i am definitely not an expert in this field) and also seems like a direction for future study. I disagree with the morality point because i think that understanding how something works is entirely different than understanding what we should do about it, but we can't know what to do without understanding the how. Thus we need people to study the how separately from the moral component in order to be moral.