If by &quot;PG made his point poorly&quot; you mean &quot;PG didn&#x27;t communicate in a way that was misunderstanding-proof&quot;, I can agree with you.  Inequality is an emotionally-charged subject that is prone to misunderstanding.  I think PG underestimated how thoroughly the intellectual basis of his argument would be missed once he uttered the words &quot;I&#x27;ve been helping to increase economic inequality.&quot;<p>Most of the critiques of PG accuse him of not caring about poor people.  And yet his essay specifically attacks poverty and lack of social mobility:<p>&gt; Let&#x27;s attack poverty, and if necessary damage wealth in the process. That&#x27;s much more likely to work than attacking wealth in the hope that you will thereby fix poverty.