This seems like an argument that proves too much. Many times, people promising simple solutions to complex problems are scammers or just wrong. But we also have lots of times where someone has an insight that cuts to the core of a problem, and we have great solutions that much better and more scalable than what has come before.

Maybe the author is on to something, but I think the idea needs to go one level deeper: what distinguishes real innovation from "solutionism"?

Also, his argument about why making work more efficient doesn't have any upside is so bafflingly wrongheaded that I highly doubt there are genuine insights to mine here.