PG and Matthew are talking past each other here. PG is defining "rich kids" as the spawn on the 1% and is arguing that these kids don't have any significant ad

PG and Matthew are talking past each other here. PG is defining "rich kids" as the spawn on the 1% and is arguing that these kids don't have any significant advantages over more normal people when it comes to accessing funding from VCs etc and that such a belief is harmful. Basically that there is a point of diminishing returns to being "rich" and that it's probably lower than you think. Matthew is arguing that being in crushing poverty is probably a barrier to building a successful startup. Both views can be basically correct.