> Startups are good for a variety of reasons, and they also happen to cause income inequality, (emphasis mine) One of the points of the original essay is that

> Startups are good for a variety of reasons, and they also happen to cause income inequality, (emphasis mine) One of the points of the original essay is that startups don't just happen to cause inequality. On the contrary pg claims that getting rich is precisely what fuels and motivates people to build startups. > therefore taking steps to reduce income inequality that happen to reduce the income inequality resulting from startups does not actually mean that it's "harm[ing] the good". The essay explicitly claims otherwise: "You can't end economic inequality without preventing people from getting rich, and you can't do that without preventing them from starting startups." I think I side with pg. Never met a person who chose the effort, uncertainty and sleepless nights that come with building a startup without the promise of a financial reward at the end. Every time such a reward is won, we inch a tiny bit towards greater inequality.