i also think it's also possible to disagree on some points. moreover, i think a lot of the people that disagree do not have the time to fully research the issu

i also think it's also possible to disagree on some points. moreover, i think a lot of the people that disagree do not have the time to fully research the issue that some people do or the platform to be heard that pg has. finally, i would point out that pg's argument is not entirely based on logic. using phrases like "shooting at poverty" and "pie in the sky thinking" mark the original text as what it is: an opinion piece, not a research paper. EDIT: there are citations. to make a (probably) logically true statement given assumptions that a large percentage of people can agree with, it's not a peer-reviewed research paper, except whatever measure of peer-review posts on medium, here, and elsewhere provide. for all i know, some economists proof-read the thing, and if so, i'd like to know which ones.