Well probably not, but he is certainly distancing himself clearly from the market fundamentalists who view recent trends in wealth and income inequality through pink eye glasses. Following on other recent columns in the same vein (see this and this), he is making a lot more sense than much of the economics commentariat these days.
But I will give him a hard time on another matter. Wolf writes:
Estimated at $59bn, Mr Slim’s fortune is equal to 6.6 per cent of Mexico’s gross domestic product. Bill Gates, in contrast, at about $56bn, is worth a mere 0.4 per cent of US GDP. Even at its peak John D. Rockefeller’s wealth was less than 2 per cent of US GDP. The richest person in the US would need $900bn to possess the same wealth, relative to US GDP, as Mr Slim does relative to Mexico’s.
Now Martin knows as well as any economist that dividing a stock (wealth) by a flow (GDP) is a no-no, and immediately classifies you as economically illiterate, along with those others who divide, say, stock-market valuations of multinational enterprises with country GDPs to say things like "these companies are bigger than whole economies..."
UPDATE: OK, I was just checking to see how many people are awake and reading beyond the first paragraph... Apparently many are!