I'll admit that I read PG's piece coincidentally when it was just posted and formed my article shortly after, but I'd have been writing something else ("thinkpi

I'll admit that I read PG's piece coincidentally when it was just posted and formed my article shortly after, but I'd have been writing something else ("thinkpiece") around that period of time anyway if I hadn't come across it. I've wanted to start writing about economic inequality for quite some time, and this was a convenient stepping off point. I take issue with #2, though: if everyone knows those points, why did PG fail to address them adequately in his original piece? The data supporting my perspective are quite compelling and not yet disproven. I'll agree my piece isn't insightful: I considered it a diligence to reply point by point (by the book, perhaps) specifically because influential people cannot go unchallenged when they make faulty arguments.