If you're interested in the topic, you'd probably want to look at the source the article cites: https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distr...

The raw data isn't biased or opinionated, and is a better source when thinking about wealth/income inequality.

Ha, you beat me to it.

It would be really nice if there was a chart that indicated who was in what category - Household wealth of $X or greater puts you in the top 10%. But even that needs some more information. How are houses counted? I've seen some that say that the primary home is excluded and I've seen some that say that the equity in the primary home is included.

Color me surprised, you mean regular people don't have 10k to drop on a few shares of tesla?!?!?

I'm tired of articles that take some smaller detail of an actual story and frame it as a paradigm shifting realization.

The topic of wealth inequality and/or wealth hoarding are very interesting topics that I don't feel are represented properly by headlines like "Rich people own 89% of the stock market"

Maybe I'm overly cynical but I'm sure anyone who's been interested in the stock market at all understand fully that it is purely a rich person's game and any peasants that participate are like remoras on their bellies hoping to eat the scraps.

It’s up, but not really by that much. 30 years ago it was 82% from that graph. Wealth is always concentrated at the top. The better question is: what’s the quality of life for the middle class like over time?

  > That means the richest disproportionately profited off the strong market performance over the year.

Oh they are so "lucky" those guys. I'm sure there is nothing illegal going on from the richest 1% of the population... They follow all the laws to the letter, sir, yes sir!