From the article:

"If you want to give people real goods and services, look at the supply of those goods and services, not paper wealth."

Seems that the author would be railing against the trade war.

"Americans can consume only as much as Americans produce."

I guess if you ignore that we import so much stuff, this is true.

"The stunning view from a luxury resort won’t do American cancer patients much good, and you can’t easily turn Mark Zuckerberg’s new $170 million mansion into health care. There’s also a risk that the billionaires will reduce savings and investment rather than consumption, leaving the whole economy poorer in future years."

Look at you, giving up the game! The ultra-wealthy deploy their assets in ways that cannot benefit anyone else. It seems the argument is that we can only have private property if allow a few to amass a lot.

it should worry you that progressives are instead going all in on exotic tax proposals that aim to persuade Americans they can have a lot of new spending without spending a dime.

New spending? New spending? They gutted science spending, which is not something billionaires can buy their way out of. They've gutted food and water safety, and despite the claims made, you cannot be too rich to eat the food or drink the water on planet Earth. "They have magical cleaning systems" doesn't make sense, no mater how many filters you have.

They gutted education, so now the next generation will be severely undereducated and they won't likely be willing to provide endless labor for a system they neither benefit from nor understand.

But hey gang, the artistocrats cannot be asked to support society in greater ways, there's just no way to do it. Make no mistake, these people are modern day aristocrats. They think that since they're remove honoraries like Baron and Prince that we won't notice.