Impure software engineering generates too much technical debt.

That's a pretty absolutist statement for what the article states is a very broad subject, well beyond code. Can you elaborate what you mean, or whether you have a different definition of impure software engineering?

I agree, but not because impure engineering is bad (like OP is suggesting). It's because tech debt is often a result of changing requirements. It's part of the nature of impure software development. Thinking tech debt is a reflection of poor engineering or bad practices is just plain wrong, imo. It's part of the job.

There is this fantasy (primarily pushed by the pure devs), that impure/enterprise dev is like following a recipe. The stakeholder gives you the requirements (ingredients, how to cook) and your job is to execute that. And anyone that has spent a non-trivial amount of time in the enterprise world knows this just not how it works. Unlike a video game where there will eventually be an end date, impure devs often have to build solutions that don't have an expiration date. And that's not easy development, trust me.

Impure software engineering funds your paycheck

And impure engineers would say that that pure engineering produces too much bankruptcy because you never ship a viable product. ;-)

lol.

I mean, of course it does? Requirements change, priorities change, rules/laws change, which all contributes to a constantly moving codebase.

When you're building a video game, do you have to worry about Congress changing healthcare laws? Cmon.