Inequality could be lower than people think

This is the exact sort of ridiculously contrarian article that made me stop caring for The Economist.<p>&gt;If you argue that income has shrunk you also have to claim that four decades’ worth of innovation in goods and services, from mobile phones and video streaming to cholesterol-lowering statins, have not improved middle-earners’ lives.<p>I don’t see how the availability of better per dollar technology is an argument that income hasn’t shrunk. Technology, for the consumer class, comes out of disposable income. Businesses (and their wealthy owners) are the biggest financial winners of tech. By a landslide.<p>What about the lack of(available) durable goods. I live around things that are older than me, but things made in the last ~30 years haven’t withstood the test of time so well. That seems like a huge cost I’ve never seen accounted for.<p>I don’t see them addressing the rising cost relative to inflation (as best I can tell) on necessities like food and shelter.<p>Maybe I’m just dumb and full of myself, but this reads like propaganda. The argument about pensions is decent but I think most people who care about economics were already aware of that, and even that is kinda sketch because the pensions are often managed by ultra-wealthy hedge fund managers who line their pockets.

Given that over half a million families file medical bankruptcies in the United States annually, I find the Economist to lack credibility on the issue.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnbc.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;02&#x2F;11&#x2F;this-is-the-real-reason-most-americans-file-for-bankruptcy.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cnbc.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;02&#x2F;11&#x2F;this-is-the-real-reason-most...</a>

I only encounter two groups of people in my life:<p>People with more money than they can sanely spend who nonetheless feel slightly as if they&#x27;re behind the curve<p>People who are struggling to make ends meet every day and who are one or two pay checks (or dole payments) from significant hardship.<p>There hardly seems to be a middle any more. Nothing is more difficult than to be of modest financial ambition. I don&#x27;t know how well graphs can plot this kind of imbalance.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20191129144436&#x2F;https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.economist.com&#x2F;leaders&#x2F;2019&#x2F;11&#x2F;28&#x2F;inequality-could-be-lower-than-you-think" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20191129144436&#x2F;https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.econo...</a>

I live in a single-earner household, with 3 kids and 2 adults in the house.<p>My oldest son is in college. I really do not see the problem with college expenses, so long as the student abides by a few guidelines:<p>- In the high school years, the student should recognize that their primary job is to line up scholarships. Nothing beats a good ACT score, and very good study books can be had at GoodWill for $1.<p>- Once at college, eat at the caf. Every. Single. Meal. College kids have no business eating out.<p>- Have a summer job, the primary goal is to make money.<p>- Don&#x27;t use Spotify, NetFlix, etc. No subscription services.<p>We fund half of what my son&#x27;s scholarships don&#x27;t pay, he pays the rest with summer-job money. It&#x27;s working so well I expect the other 2 kids to graduate debt-free as well.

Its never been this good for so many people.

Or higher:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Wealth_inequality_in_the_United_States#&#x2F;media&#x2F;File:US_Wealth_Inequality_-_v2.png" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Wealth_inequality_in_the_Unite...</a>

Yes, maybe. But like saying Climate Change might not be as bad we think, what does the general population have to lose by working toward alternative energy sources and technologies or regulations and laws that lead to greater equality for most people?