I don't understand your thesis here it seems self-contradictory:
1. "I don't think this is real news / important because solving grade school math is not a predictor of ability to do complex reasoning."
2. "LLMs can't solve grade school math because they're bad at arithmetic, algebra and most importantly reasoning."
So... from 2 automatically follows that LLMs with sufficiently better math may be sufficiently better at reasoning as you said "most importantly" reasoning is relevant for their ability to do math. Saying "most importantly reasoning" and then saying that reasoning is irrelevant if they can do math, is odd.
1. "I don't think this is real news / important because solving grade school math is not a predictor of ability to do complex reasoning."
2. "LLMs can't solve grade school math because they're bad at arithmetic, algebra and most importantly reasoning."
So... from 2 automatically follows that LLMs with sufficiently better math may be sufficiently better at reasoning as you said "most importantly" reasoning is relevant for their ability to do math. Saying "most importantly reasoning" and then saying that reasoning is irrelevant if they can do math, is odd.