> [pg is] not going to wake up tomorrow, admit that nobody is asking for 100% income equality and that he was a dishonest sack of shit for pretending otherwise

> [pg is] not going to wake up tomorrow, admit that nobody is asking for 100% income equality and that he was a dishonest sack of shit for pretending otherwise pg did not make the claim that anyone is arguing for "100% income equality"; he did not posture as if that was the position he was arguing against. You're making things up and are being appropriately downvoted for it. The topic of this essay was: "[E]conomic inequality is not just one thing. It consists of some things that are very bad, like kids with no chance of reaching their potential, and others that are good, like Larry Page and Sergey Brin starting the company you use to find things online. If you want to understand economic inequality—and more importantly, if you actually want to fix the bad aspects of it—you have to tease apart the components. And yet the trend in nearly everything written about the subject is to do the opposite: to squash together all the aspects of economic inequality as if it were a single phenomenon." If he oversimplifies his opposition at all, it's to characterize their position as "economic inequality is bad and should be decreased". He positions that argument as the one in opposition to his. It sounds like you've misunderstood what he's written and are attributing positions to him that he did not write.