The GINI can be measured before or after taxes. The link you shared is after--this one is used in defense of the metric. A 'before tax' version[3] is invariably used when on offense.

Sure, wealth inequality is growing, but this isn't a problem, it's merely an emotionally resonant issue. The left love it for the same reason they lofted the 'poverty' banner for so long--it's a Philosopher's Stone. This particular stone hails from a failed German novelist and promises to transmute other people's money into votes!

Regardless, median income[0] and median net worth[1] are rising and poverty is in the doldrums--points which make it difficult to make an honest argument that we are in need of radical change.

[0] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA646N [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOGZ1FL192090005Q [3] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/gini-coefficient-before-t...

Ok, so you agree inequality is growing and but don't recognize it as a problem. Let me ask you something, when you are buying a house, and you are competing with multi-millionaires and billionaires for the bid, who do you think will win? There are limited amount of real assets available at any given time and wealth inequality means regular people hold less of the assets each year, making them poorer. If the vast majority of people are losing wealth every year, how is that not a problem?

Not him, but I will reply on his behalf...

>There are limited amount of real assets available at any given time

This is correct.

>and wealth inequality means regular people hold less of the assets each year, making them poorer

This is not. New wealth is constantly being created. There isn't a fixed amount of pie on the table.

Don't disagree that new wealth is being created, what matters when talking about quality of life and inequality, is who are the beneficiaries of this new wealth? Is it the already wealthy? If so, that's part of the positive feedback loop to drive inequality further. More assets, Yay. Held by fewer and fewer people over time. Boo.

The new wealth is being created BY and FOR the already wealthy. That's literally what capitalism is! New wealth creation is certainly not driven by poor Steve who does not have money to start a new business or market his new IP.

How much of the money made by the Harry Potter Franchise went to JK rowling vs her publishers? Supposedly she got a 15% royalty rate, which is considered "High"

That should be revealing on it's own.

Yes, wealth is constantly being created, however let's look at the facts

- Market prices: ~15% annualized increase over the last two years

- House prices: 5-7% annualized increase

- Gold: 10-12% annualized increase

- Compared to GDP growth of only 2.1-2.7% annualized

If GDP growth is only 2.7% while the wealth of the top who own assets is up 15% annualized, where is the 12.3% coming from? It's coming the bottom.

We live in an economy that has wealth redistribution. It's being distributed from the majority to a small minority.

In other words, yes the pie is growing, but the slice of a the top 10% of the pie is growing much faster.