No. The premise is factual only if you make the arbitrary assumption that the purpose of human society is to provide an environment where some people may progress and prosper as much as possible even if it has to be at the expense of others.

If you make the assumption that the purpose of human society is to provide the greatest good for the greatest number, and to minimize pain and suffering as much as possible for as many as possible, you arrive at a very different conclusion.

Following the premise of the original article, children, the old, the sick and infirm, and anyone not directly engaged in productive and accumulative activity, deserves to be punished for their failure to be economic bullies.

The only difference between economic bullies and the other kind is that economic bullies can afford to hire others to do their fighting for them.

And you don't have to be an economic victim or a physical weakling to believe that every human being has an obligation to every other human being. The purpose of human society is not to make sure everyone has the same access to resources. It is to guarantee that that no one is denied an access to the bare minimum of resources.

If the rich and their wannabees can't grok that, they are free to go on strike, go off to their Galt's Gulch, and shrug their asses off all they want.