Progressive neolibs unironically believe exploitative and extractive forms of "free trade" is the most efficient way to lift developing nations out of poverty, and that they follow "evidence-based policy" (by which they mean "empirical" studies done by international-development and trade economists, funded by NGOs and running econometric regressions using e.g. World Bank data). If you condemn this approach to solving world poverty, they may straight up ask you, "why don't you care about the global poor?" because they don't have the imagination needed to envision an alternative trade system that's actually equitable for all people regardless of nationality instead of just being a Pareto improvement. These neolibs will also claim credit for the rapid rise in the PRC's living standards (because of all the western capital invested in the late 20th century) despite the PRC's economy having features of central planning with partially publicly-owned companies while most other developing countries to receive such investment have had the Chicago-boy austerity and privatization treatment forced onto them by one of the IMF, World Bank, or WTO with significantly less success, the same sort of schemes which they bitterly oppose when proposed by Republicans, Tories, etc. in their own countries. When they eventually notice this contradiction they either stop being progressive or they stop being neoliberals.