I don't really have a position either way on whether what PG says is true, but it's wrong to say that PG is amazing at "existence and dynamics of wealth creatio

I don't really have a position either way on whether what PG says is true, but it's wrong to say that PG is amazing at "existence and dynamics of wealth creation". He's amazing at "wealth creation", that does not make him an expert on the effects of that wealth creation on society, or the work done in society as a prerequisite for that wealth creation. If I am a programmer, it does not make me an expert on the dynamics of the open source software community, nor does it even make me an expert on the theoretical underpinnings of the type system I'm using. We don't need PG to point out the existence of wealth creation, nor do we need him to tell us about the dynamics of it, when we have multiple sciences with their own experts (economics, economic sociology, world political economy). It's also a dubious assumption to say that economic inequality only relates to wealth creation. Even if that was the only relation, writing about economic inequality and the actual fact of wealth creation are still not identical, they are only related. PG is more qualified than most to talk about this, but he's certainly not the most qualified, and the study of the matters of inequality are tangential to his work at best.