I regard pg's essays as I do Malcolm Gladwell's books: they are often entertaining, occasionally insightful, and never something that I would cite in an argument. (And for all the same reasons.)
I'm curious what your reasons are.
... but that doesn't resolve the much greater economic divide between the various socio-economic classes
Your statement implies that you believe an economic divide is bad in some way. Can you elaborate on what you believe is bad about it?
pg's essay postulates reasons why people think an economic divide is bad. Then he gives a logical argument why each reason is incorrect.
It's bad because wealth is finite.
No, wealth is not finite, you can create it. You can
build your own house for example and you've created wealth.
It's bad because you have to do something immoral to get rich
No, while true historically, it is now possible to get rich by creating wealth.
And he also suggests that while the gap in bank accounts is growing the gap in life-style is shrinking.
I'm curious what your reasons are.
... but that doesn't resolve the much greater economic divide between the various socio-economic classes
Your statement implies that you believe an economic divide is bad in some way. Can you elaborate on what you believe is bad about it?
pg's essay postulates reasons why people think an economic divide is bad. Then he gives a logical argument why each reason is incorrect.
It's bad because wealth is finite.
No, wealth is not finite, you can create it. You can build your own house for example and you've created wealth.
It's bad because you have to do something immoral to get rich
No, while true historically, it is now possible to get rich by creating wealth.
And he also suggests that while the gap in bank accounts is growing the gap in life-style is shrinking.