Given in Graham's essay he comes out and discusses the Gini coefficient, it doesn't seem like a "thinly veiled" anything. The point of the essay is to discuss how much inequality itself matters (as opposed to, say poverty, lack of access to health care, or other things other people are raising as legitimate concerns).
> What he fails to mention is that concerns about wealth inequality aren't concerned with how wealth was generated but rather the growing wealth gap that has accelerated in recent decades.
My take away from Graham's article is that, all else being equal, we should care about how wealth was generated, and the gap itself is less important.
> Tech has made startups both cheaper and easier but only for a small percentage of people.
This is probably true, but again I think it misses the point that Graham is making: Creating a new company is overall simpler today than it was in the 1970's and 1980's, and so the "small percentage of people" who can start companies now is larger than it was 40 years ago.
> Paul paints a rosy picture but doesn't mention that incomes for lower and middle-class families have fallen since the 80s.
For a more thorough and balanced analysis of what this author refers to, see Russ Roberts's series on these questions: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLRZf05zFBLXIKLD3blbnn... . There are several factors that make these long-term trend analyses hard: changing family compositions, changing quality of goods, and challenges with price indexes.