Your 2nd paragraph: merely your assertion ('freaking out' suggests you're not dispassionate about this). Plenty of rebuttals. A short one to be going on with here:
http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/economics/thomas-pikettys-late...
This asserts that these two are entirely unrelated, which is jumping to conclusions at best. Also, a reduction in inequality is a redistribution of wealth by definition, something Piketty points out at the very beginning of his book.
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141218/tyler-cowen/ca...
Ultimately a very political subject though, so I flagged it.
http://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/kapital-for-the-twent...
[author] has a habit of [baseless insult]
hurr, durr, [attack_target]'s too stoopid/misleading you so everything he says is wrong.
And yes, you are misleading. Because if I didn't actually go read that article and find the part you were complaining about I would have assumed an actual insult was where you claimed it was. Whereas, in fact, I found criticism, which the author attempts to justify/backup in the rest of the article. But you'd have us believe that that was all that was in the whole article. That's called misleading people; pretty much general dishonesty on your part.