Subject: Re: Should I change how I invest? Confused in the U
Is that so? I don't doubt the statement when it's about the last 250 years. But what about the last decades, say the last 30 years? ...

I have no dog in this race, but might as well start with a few numbers rather than anecdotes and impressions.

Globally:
Depending on the precise metric you use, global wealth inequality peaked some date between 1980 and 2000. It has fallen a lot since then.
The global Gini coeffient peaked around 2000 at around 0.72 and has fallen to around 0.67. (that was the second peak at about the same level, the first peak being around 1910)
The ratio to top-10% average income to bottom-50% average income peaked around 1980 at about 53x, having risen most of the time since 1820. It has been falling since the 1980 peak, to about 38. This is now about the lowest (tied with a couple of eras) since around the 1890s.
https://wir2022.wid.world/chap...
This has been primarily due to the fact that a whole lot of destitute people are no longer destitute, but now merely poor. It doesn't say much about the middle classes in rich countries, who simply aren't numerous enough on a global scale to move the needle on this measure. But it does give one some hope--global equality has fallen a lot. A small change in Gini is a very large change on the ground. (a Gini of 1 means one person gets it all)

Within the US:
Flattish trend, overall. The US Gini coefficient after taxes and after transfers has been remarkably flat. 1988=0.416, 2020=0.417. The three year rolling average is up a hair in that stretch, from 0.414 to 0.428, but that isn't a whole lot.

Americans have become richer in terms of income, but it hasn't just been the rich.
The real after-tax after-transfer average income among the top quintile of households rose 2.17%/year 1997-2020: The rich have become a lot richer.
The real after-tax after-transfer average income among the bottom quintile of households rose about 2.01%/year 1997-2020. Americans have helped the poor quite a lot.
The difference is not so large that one would characterize it as "the rich are crushing the poor".

The main reason for the impression is (other than press stories) that the middle three quintiles, the vociferous and numerous middle classes, have done worse than either extreme. Up only 1.39%/year in those 41 years.

US data from the Congressional Budget Office, specifically the data tables underlying this presentation https://www.cbo.gov/publicatio...


Since someone mentioned New Zealand, the pre-tax income inequality has indeed risen, relative to lows in the early 1980s. Similar to the effects above, it is a little more equal than the ~2000 peak.

But looking at more history, inequality fell a LOT from the 1920s (start of this particular table) to the 1980s, and fairly steadily. The rise since the 1980s has brought it only back up to the levels typical of a point on that trend around 1940. From a different source (inequality.org.nz), the really bad times were the 19th century. The income share of the top 1% has fallen from 65% (!) in 1893 to 25% in 2018. (25% being pretty typical for most periods since the last 1930s, other than a more egalitarian stretch around the '65-'85.
I suspect the after-tax after-transfers figures would be very much flatter in the last 50 years. Like most countries (and more so than many), New Zealand has a lot of social programs which make life a little easier for the less well off, and the number of such facilities is higher than it was.

Overall, I think a lot of the (often false) consensus about inexorably rising inequality is that middle class in rich countries haven't done as well as some other groups in recent years (the rich, the rich-world poor, and the impoverished), and nobody pays much attention to anyone other than the middle classes in rich countries. Despite the press, there are formerly very poor people in a lot of places you might not immediately expect. I was searching on line for a fairly high tech product this morning, and it is made only in Colombia. 70% of the folks in Kenya use mobile banking.

The plutocrats are certainly having a great time, and (as always) doing what they can to make sure the rules sustain this happy (for them) situation. But in some ways things are getting better, and they are sort of fighting a rearguard action.

Jim