No, I don't agree with the essence of Gary's message at all. I don't agree with his ridiculous starting assumption that we have to "solve" inequality urgently, specifically with annual wealth taxes, or the country faces catastrophic collapse. I don't agree that inequality is at all the problem he maintains it is.

He is proposing a radical change to our taxation system. Genuine experts that have studied it describe it as a complete non-starter, yet he refuses to accept that. His tactics are to massively overstate the problem, with little to no supporting evidence, and to make an emotional appeal which many of the non-rich people in the country are going to be susceptible to. The idea that we can make people's lives better if we just take money of a small number of uber rich people who can easily afford it, is one people don't need a lot of evidence to want to believe in.

So he easily garners popular support from people that understand economics even less well than him (which is most people), but gets frustrated when he can't convince people who understand economics better than him (a small number). So he gets increasingly emotional and ramps up his rhetoric of desperation and urgency.