[jesuschroist]

The article doesn't really use a strict equality between being "intelligent" and being good at making money. It's more an implication, that being good at making money implies being probably something like "intelligent".

Now having this established, your examples of playing the violin and Hollywood stars doesn't make any sense. They are reading the relation backwards. The implication holds the other way round.

[croon]

The implication you are pointing at still an assumption.

If we can't assume that Hollywood stars or concert violinists are intelligent (even if not all intelligent people can be those things), then why would it naturally be so with financially successful people?

The examples still make sense under the premise that the assumption is off.

[jesuschroist]

Sure, it's an assumption.

But saying that all concert violinists are intelligent is something different than saying that everybody, who is intelligent, is a concert violinist.