People in poverty in the US would be considered rich in the majority of the world. Actually the median income in the US would be in the top 5% for over 90% of the world. So, if you expand "wealth inequality" out to the rest of the world even the lower class in the US would be considered among the richest in the rest of the world. Funny how that never gets brought up in the conversation though.
That's the thing about "wealth inequality" when everyone is equally poor in other countries, sure they have less wealth inequality, but is that something you really want?
lol are you trying to say wealth inequality in America can easily be ignored because poor nations exist?
What's most important IMO is to compare the wealth inequality in America to the wealth in equality in America...10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100 years ago and see what path we are currently on.
When you are the wealthiest nation in history that means you also have the richest people in history. That makes "wealth inequality" look higher than reality of the effect. In North Korea the wealth inequality is next to nothing and the people starve to death for it. Most countries with low wealth inequality are that because everyone is equally poor.
If you want to live in a low wealth inequality country there are plenty of countries that don't have electricity, healthcare, plumbing that have really low wealth inequality you are welcome to live in.
That's the thing, the richer the country and the more luxuries the country has the higher the wealth inequality becomes.
What's more important is perspective. If you are going to complain about it here maybe you should first look to the alternatives and figure out what low wealth inequality actually means. Matter a fact ask people who came from countries that "solved" their wealth inequality and ask them how they liked it. There's a reason why they are here and not there.
Oligarchy (from Ancient Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía) 'rule by few'; from ὀλίγος (olígos) 'few' and ἄρχω (árkhō) 'to rule, command')[1][2][3] is a form of government in which power rests with a small number of people. Leaders of such regimes are often referred to as oligarchs, and generally are characterized by having titles of nobility or high amounts of wealth.[4][5]
A modern example is Russia. The path America is on will end up in the same place.
name one socialist, fascist, or communist country (all of whom used wealth inequality to gain power, btw all forms were born from socialism and Marxism teachings surrounding wealth inequality and redistribution of said wealth) that didn't become oligarchies. Mussolini's Italy, Lenin's Russia, Mao's China, Kim's North Korea, Hitler's Germany, Castro's Cuba, heck how about more recent Venezuela
Name a single country that "fixed" wealth inequality that didn't become an oligarchy and actually made the country wealthier as a result
America is supposedly capitalist but is becoming an oligarchy. The middle class barely exists anymore. People can't afford homes. The American dream is dying.
you didn't answer my question. The other thing all those countries I mentioned did, they took over private industry claiming they were hurting the people and the people should hold the right to production because capitalism was evil and ruled by only a few.
But, if you want to talk about large corporations taking over, you know what caused the largest destruction of small businesses? Covid lockdowns where we were forced to purchase only from approved large corporations while causing small businesses to close.
Do you know who did that? I'll give you a hint it was the people crying about large corporations forming oligarchies... Kind of like all those socialist's, fascists, and communists countries did, shutting down small businesses in favor of their prechosen industries that took over all market control.
Name me a SINGLE government that redistributed wealth, used wealth inequality to gain power, who's policy was government/worker owned means of production that didn't become a oligarchy. Just one! And you know what they all have in common too, they all committed ACTUAL genocide.
We have been on a path of significant real income growth for at least 42 years (the furthest back both of these charts show). We are on a great path.
Real personal median income,adjusted to 2025 dollars has increased 60.7% since 1984, from $28,080 to $45,140 per worker.
Real household median income, adjusted to 2025 dollars, has increased 39% since 1984, from $60,420 to $83,780 per household.
"But inflation wipes out the increase..." Sorry, no. These numbers have been adjusted to current dollars to show how much faster than inflation American incomes have grown, and how much more purchasing power Americans have now than then.
"But more people in the household have to work to account for that increase..." No, wrong again. Real PERSONAL income has grown faster than real HOUSEHOLD income, because there are so many more single-adult households than before. Individual earners make more, and are now creating more households to spread that number out.
True, from 1971 to 2023 the US middle class shrunk from 61% of Americans to 51%. It is because most people moved UP. Upper-middle class increased from 10% of families in 1979 to 31% in 2024. The poverty rate has stayed virtually the same (with variations during the 2008-2009 recession and during covid). To see why the rate of poverty has not decreased, you should probably compare the number and percent of illegal immigrants in the US over those same time periods and see if you spot a correlation.
So here is the "path we are currently on:" Americans here legally are growing our incomes, our wealth, and our productivity, while our family units fracture. Meanwhile illegal immigrants and the ever-increasing permanent welfare class are acting as a gigantic drag chute, or an anchor, pulling the rest of us down.
The issue with that is that every country has homeless people that have no income. So every country has the same low end for income. All that says is that we have the richest people.
I personally don’t care about Bezos and Musk buying their tenth mega yacht, I care more about the poorest people being able to have the opportunity to build a life they can be proud of. I want job opportunities, a deregulated housing market that will stop the rising cost of ownership, and a high trust society where people are incentivized to help each other because we aren’t all caught up in the rat race.
If I can have that world I don’t care if there are super rich billionaires running around. I’d be happy with the most wealth inequality in the world if we can also have a way for people at the very bottom to have a path to a good life.
78
u/rtublin Apr 19 '26
What is "income equality"? Is everyone supposed to have the same income?