The obvious riposte is that the fact that money/resources are not equally distributed is foundational to the economic concept of demand (viz. "the amount of money/resources an entire market is willing to exchange for something, constrained by potential market participants' initial money/resource allocations"), particularly as the notion of economic demand is frequently elided with "what the public wants in proportion to how much they want it" to push an alternative specific narrative.

(I'm less impressed with the rest of what I'm skimming through of the early chapters than I thought I might be, but not even the most value-free and purely technical approach to teaching how an economy is believed to work is free from narrative implications)