The mounting criticism of mounting inequality is a political position. It's not an objective statement of fact. They are free to ignore it if they disagree with it.
> The mounting criticism of mounting inequality is a political position. It's not an objective statement of fact.
The mounting inequality itself is however not just an opinion.
> They are free to ignore the mounting criticism
But they're not ignoring it as such, and IMHO it's gotten to the point where it would be foolish to do so. So now they're supplying an alternative political position on what to do - i.e. don't worry, markets will sort everything out.
How much inequality is a problem can be an opinion, but what we have is a trend to growing inequality.
At least that you are OK with total inequality (or with a systemic collapse) we should start to look at this carefully.
And this is what the article deal with, what is saying is: "the trend is going to reverse because it was born from demographics, nothing to do with the Washington Consensus, the dismantling of worker protections and other small details."
Of course, this is from a right-wing magazine, so they could just be making it up to appease their owners or something.
And it also depends on the definition of poverty. Is it absolute or relative? As soon as you start talking about relative poverty, you are effectively arguing for wealth redistribution.
I think "a tweet from Nassim Taleb" carries more weight than a tweet from some random person off the internet. He does at least understand finance and economics.
The mounting inequality itself is however not just an opinion.
> They are free to ignore the mounting criticism
But they're not ignoring it as such, and IMHO it's gotten to the point where it would be foolish to do so. So now they're supplying an alternative political position on what to do - i.e. don't worry, markets will sort everything out.