I suppose I ought to mention that my original response on this was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, I did imagine my claiming to be the author, or should I write Author, of the non-existent 'If It's On The Internet It Doesn't Exist'' would underline that (vide 'I's Not On The Internet It Doesn't Exist' - K.Greenman).
I must confess the temptation of doing a Kent on Kent was impossible to resist (I had considered simply re-wording the whole of the notice and substituting either my own or a fictitious name for Kent's) though I do quite like Kent - it's just that I've never known of anybody who talks of the non-ego who hoists his own flag so much.
As for bourgeois poetry, I have no doubt that much of the poetry promoted on both sides of the Atlantic, on all sides of tradition, qualifies for that. (You could use a different epithet: consumerist poetry perhaps, wherein the status 'poet' an implied part of the package?) A person doesn't have to be bourgeois to write bourgeois poetry: in the last century W.H.Davies was an example of that, while it's certainly possible to be an anti-bourgeois bourgeois: Marx and Engels, obviously. Even Cesar Vallejo came from something like the middle class.
I always recall that the only criticism of Ulysees that bothered Joyce came from an American woman who said it was 'too middle class'.