08-09-2017, 02:19 AM
Yes, the winners are taking more, the ‘Our broken economy’ story shows
First, give credit to where it’s due: David Leonhart of The New York Times has produced a wonderful chart on income inequality in his article, “Our broken economy.”
Taken from data compiled by Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, it shows how the poor and middle class, who used to see the benefits from income growth, are now largely getting the scraps, left behind by the 1%, or really, the 0.001%.
![[Image: MW-FR891_inequa_20170808123650_ZH.jpg?uu...8e992d421e]](http://ei.marketwatch.com//Multimedia/2017/08/08/Photos/ZH/MW-FR891_inequa_20170808123650_ZH.jpg?uuid=c76c7f9e-7c57-11e7-84ee-9c8e992d421e)
The New York Times
What a chart!
Importantly, the chart adjusts not just for inflation but also taxes, transfers and non-cash benefits. Of course, there are limitations to focusing on income. A new study, as detailed on MarketWatch on Monday, shows that the gaps aren’t as large when consumption rather than income is used to measure economic performance.
Read: Most of what you think about inequality is wrong
[/url]
Income has its limitations — for example, not capturing the benefit from consumption funded from financial wealth or from durable goods. There’s also a big problem with income being underreported (though consumption also has measurement problems).
Even just focusing on income, one thing the chart demonstrates is the winners accruing far more of the gains. Technology has allowed firms to better identify top talents and for those talents to serve a bigger audience. This was well explained in another New York Times story, from 2010, o[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/business/26excerpt.html]n why superstar pay stifles everyone else.
In response, Leonhart suggests a more progressive tax code, a better functioning education system, more bargaining power for workers and less tolerance for corporate consolidation. How much any of those changes would push back against the relentless advance in technology remains to be seen.
First, give credit to where it’s due: David Leonhart of The New York Times has produced a wonderful chart on income inequality in his article, “Our broken economy.”
Taken from data compiled by Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, it shows how the poor and middle class, who used to see the benefits from income growth, are now largely getting the scraps, left behind by the 1%, or really, the 0.001%.
The New York TimesWhat a chart!
Importantly, the chart adjusts not just for inflation but also taxes, transfers and non-cash benefits. Of course, there are limitations to focusing on income. A new study, as detailed on MarketWatch on Monday, shows that the gaps aren’t as large when consumption rather than income is used to measure economic performance.
Read: Most of what you think about inequality is wrong
[/url]
Income has its limitations — for example, not capturing the benefit from consumption funded from financial wealth or from durable goods. There’s also a big problem with income being underreported (though consumption also has measurement problems).
Even just focusing on income, one thing the chart demonstrates is the winners accruing far more of the gains. Technology has allowed firms to better identify top talents and for those talents to serve a bigger audience. This was well explained in another New York Times story, from 2010, o[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/26/business/26excerpt.html]n why superstar pay stifles everyone else.
In response, Leonhart suggests a more progressive tax code, a better functioning education system, more bargaining power for workers and less tolerance for corporate consolidation. How much any of those changes would push back against the relentless advance in technology remains to be seen.