>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.
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.
- 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.
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...