I'm a little bit surprised that the closing remark of his blog post was "even if you remove all the bad causes, the good causes far outweigh the bad and will cause inequality to further increase."

I guess if one so brazenly believes that to be true, then it must naturally follow that PG would support further inequality.

So it is not that he is against economic inequality per se. He is simply sure (perhaps falsely) of its causes, and believes that if those causes are the majority drivers, then the benefits outweigh the cost.

If he were to be proven wrong about the breakdown of these causes... his opinion might shift.