Confronting Inequality by Paul Krugman: Income and Social Inequality

In paragraph 4 Krugman quotes someone whose views he does not agree with, but then uses those views to support his own argument. How do you know he is quoting a view that he disagrees with?

Below is the quote that Krugman was quoting:

"Income inequality tends to be swamped by even greater social equality...In all of our major cities, there is not a single restaurant where a CEO can lunch or dine with the absolute assurance that he will not run into his secretary. If you fly first class, who will be your traveling companions? You never know. If you go to Paris, you will be lost in a crowd of young people flashing their credit cards."
Krugman quoted this from an article published in the Wall Street Journal called "Income Inequality Without Class Conflict" written by Irving Kristol.

First of all, why did Krugman use this quote? Lets look at what he wrote after quoting Kristol.
"By claiming that income inequality doesn't matter because we have social equality, Kristol was in effect admitting that income inequality would be a problem if it led to social inequality."
Krugman was trying to make his book more well-rounded and reliable by not only looking from one perspective; his perspectives, and the side that he agrees with, but also from his opposing views. He then made a strong rebuttal to show how his opposition's view is illegitimate.

How did I know he is quoting a view that he disagrees with?
"Here's the thing: It does. Kristol's fantasy of a world in which the rich live just like you and me, and nobody feels socially inferior, bears no resemblance to the real America we live in."
It is obvious that Krugman does not agree with his views. It was demeaning enough to say that Kristol's world is a "fantasy". The word "fantasy" means something that is unreal, something that does not actually exist; an ideal world. Krugman was basically saying that Kristol lives in his own ideal world, so what he was saying are too idealistic.

Everything else that he says contradicts to what Kristol had to say. He emphasized on how Income inequality does in fact result in social inequality. For example, he backed up with statistical reports how the chances of low-income families' children getting into college is lower than high-income families, even though their children may have a higher IQ. He also said that lower-income families have worse health-care. There is no social equality; children do not have the same starting line.