What do you consider to be the article's main point?

@Krish55 the thrust: Without ever concisely defining WHO neo-liberals are, --and thus leaving to the readers to assign ANY politicians and other social leaders they dislike to that category, the article appears to be blaming most economic suffering on neo-liberals. So depending on the reader's preferences, anyone who acknowledges that some form of blending of capitalism and socialialism is actually in reality the world we have to work with, who wants to strengthen worker protections within capitalism, and who isn't calling for Marxist-style socialist revolution (as opposed to socialist-friendly evolutionary steps) may be tagged as a "dirty" neo-liberal. Who doesn't get mentioned in the article, or at least distinguished clearly as separate from neo-liberals, nor as responsible for much economic suffering are actual promoters of free-market robber barons (I call them Republicans in America).

@MikeInBatonRouge Neoliberalism is the movement to dismantle social democracy and bring back capitalism without oversight or reasonable taxation of the rich. Economic history helps us to understand the reactionary phenomena we are dealing with.

@Krish55 thank you. That is a concise definition. It doesn't match any I looked up, nor does it line up with numerous examples I have heard of public figures being accused of being neo-liberal. By that I mean certain Democrats not progressive enough for some people's liking. Specifically the desire to dismantle democracy part appears to be your particular spin on it that is inference but not definition. The rest of your description actually fairly well matches libertarianism.

@MikeInBatonRouge Chilean democracy was destroyed in 1973 in order to install a dictatorship practicing neoliberalism. Neoliberalism works more subtly in the US. First, it cuts taxes for the rich and then budgets for the public. When the local democratically-elected governments can't function, they are then put under emergency management - composed of businessmen. These are the folks who decided to use poisoned water for Flint. To get free rein for their unpopular practices, neoliberals have to destroy or subvert democracy. I describe this and other examples in my book: The Teacher's Manifesto

@Krish55 all very disturbing. I appreciate the information you are posting. What I have read points to the fact that the term itself is being used a variety of ways, leading to a lot of confusion. You are describing cynical conservative tactics, and yet it was conservatives, starting with Ronald Reagan, that purposely turned "liberal" into an insult word, such that Neo-liberalism would seem to people to be more associated with liberals than conservative. Yet it is absolutely reflective of current goals of Republican leadership on Congress. Despite that, I hear the label applied negatively to Hillary Clinton, and even Elizabeth Warren; not so much any Republicans, or even conservative Dems.. It is way off-base.