According to that liberal bastion, the Wall Street Journal, in it's most favorable light, median worker compensation has only gone up about 40% since 1979 [1]. On the other hand CEO compensation over that period has gone up about 1000%. [2] We can quibble about sources if you like, but according to this [3] it's taken about 50 years to double income.

If you take a long look at that same graph [3], productivity has climbed, dramatically. Perhaps the depression of wages was caused by almost doubling the workforce, adding women.

Eh, it's probably not that big of a deal. that wsj article pointed out it's really just young men without much education that are taking the hit. I really doubt having millions of young, broke, easily persuaded males will cause much of a problem. Historically, that's always worked out just fine

Less snarkily, economists from Greenspan to Krugman have said this is something that needs to be looked at. It's an indicator of something being not right. It's clear you have an economic model in mind. It's the job of the market to push that pay edge as hard as possible, get as much productivity for as little pay as possible. Have you considered that the market might push so hard that your economic model doesn't apply?

[1] http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/07/06/just-how-stagnant-...

[2] http://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-continues-to-rise/

[3] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Producti...