I am apparently the only one that liked the article a lot. It's certainly a lot better than the original Graeber article which to me is a masterclass in stumbli

I am apparently the only one that liked the article a lot. It's certainly a lot better than the original Graeber article which to me is a masterclass in stumbling over well known paradoxes and puzzles in economics and substituting in his own deranged ideas instead of the generally accepted answers among actual economists.