Only ONE short response!

This time this assignment is only one response , which is to respond to this (paragraph A) which is written by my classmate in Online discussion:

paragraph A:

"The book says that a neoliberal approach "promotes the power of market based decision-makers over that of public or government-based decision makers." The book goes on to say that as an affect of neoliberalism, "public services and welfare supports decline, individuals alone are expected to ensure their well-being through smart consumerism and investing wisely for their retirement." So is the struggling middle class, and the rise in informal work an indicator that states should have more control over the market instead of a neoliberal approach? Why is the idea of being a welfare state, or implementing more welfare programs perceived as bad by some people in the U.S.? It seems like without first implementing welfare supports, markets wouldn't be able to be allocated through a neoliberal approach. So how will our current market's sustain themselves in the future? "

And to make it easier for you, below is an example of a respond to the previous paragraph (paragraph A) by another classmate: (His reply is too long, it just an example to truck the topic, so make yours short as usual) 

"The people who are against the government welfare system oppose it because of the damage they believe it does. There is this notion that people who oppose welfare do so to protect their own wealth, and are thus motivated by greed and selfishness. The real reason people are critical of welfare is because they believe it causes damage to individuals and society. In the opinion of economist Milton Friedman, welfare does this in a number of ways: much of the money that is paid into welfare programs is wasted through government inefficiency; welfare ultimately reduces individual liberty; welfare policies encourage class and racial divisions/hostility. Here is a 9 minute video wherein he explains how this happens: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJEP1BzSeMQ

Those in favor of free market solutions to poverty are not suggesting that we just leave the poor out to dry. They are saying that private charities and philanthropic endeavors are much more efficient uses of compassionate giving, because money is always spent most judiciously by the one who earned it. Charity existed way before there was a welfare state- through churches, private charities, or just neighbors and family. To discontinue the welfare system would not be to abandon compassionate giving, but transfer its resources to a more prudent custodian.This same principal applies to retirement saving (via individual retirement accounts) and the privatization of various public services."

Thanks