Meh. I didn&#x27;t write a follow up to PG&#x27;s follow up because I assumed he wouldn&#x27;t be receptive to my arguments and didn&#x27;t want to start a war of words over a topic that has been rehashed a bajillion times. Even the economists are saying we need to reduce economic inequality if we want to avoid disaster. That&#x27;s far more topical thought and information than anyone arguing on HN can bring to bear, I assume. (I really hope I am right.)<p>The OP article is definitely factual with its four main points-- I&#x27;d also like to add that the trick of putting yourself into the opposing position&#x27;s shoes and reconstructing their argument is one of the best rhetorical techniques that exists.