However most humans can do at least some of the things given they spend the required effort.

Some problems presented needs a very large context and some are not much solvable (e.g. trading) since market responds to traders' actions, as well, making it effectively an oracle problem (of computation).

On the other hand, we must be aware that these models are static, and they indeed stop when nobody asks something or requests an action from them. However, brains in nature never stops. Wonder, daydream, sleep, self-evolve, clean up and eliminate memories and views and much more.

Humans are AGI simply because if they want to, they can achieve it (it just takes some effort).

I'm guessing their defn of AGI is something like the sum total of all humans' abilities? Still though some of those tasks (e.g. beat an index fund) may very well be impossible, and worse yet a lot of those tasks are not coherently defined.

I haven't met a person who doesn't wonder about things.

They can't, by definition, have the A part btw.

AGI has always been expected to outperform humans or else what is the point of it?