You're right I probably should be more charitable, but I don't see any other way to read GP other than them denying basic economics. The comment that they were replying to did not say it was a good thing and they liked it. Sure it may have been implicit to some, but if GP was objecting to that, they should have used something other than the word no.
If they were responding to this part:
> why would you work hard to create value for others in a system like that?
Then their answer of no makes no sense, so I don't see a way to be much more charitable