Thanks for this, sorry I was unclear. I do not think it was worth it.

So after a deadly recession, that prompted an even more deadly third world debt crisis, we successfully replaced inflation with permanently increased unemployment and wage stagnation in both poor and rich countries. So was it worth it?

Basically the point I'm making is that the human costs were clearly disproportionate to the benefits. The only possible argument to defend the Volcker shock is that there was no alternative, but I go on to argue this only seems the case in hindsight.

Economists of the time were offering alternatives, and they only seem absurd because nonmarket solutions to problems have been completely excluded from discussion since the rise of neoliberalism.

My statement that "it's time for a second opinion on shock therapy." is the basic thesis of the article. There are alternatives to the current system, and they don't have to be perfect to be an improvement.

I also discuss the catastrophic human costs of structural adjustment programs which can be traced back to the Volcker Shock in more detail here. https://econsystemsthinking.medium.com/review-the-divide-a-brief-guide-to-global-inequality-and-its-solutions-b1fb5680d1ab