∴ If a certain quintile of population is gathering more resources, necessarily other sections of the population are losing compensatory access to these same resources.
----
We can argue zero-sum (or not) all day long, but wealth inequality is increasing (globally, as well as US) and it shows most (anecdotally; statistically) along borders of haves & have nots.
I happen to live along such a border, as do both of my wealthier brothers (I'm the one on the other side of the tracks, but I live respectfully, with simple grace). The majority of americans are broker than broke, whether they live in a big financed house or a cardboard box — the latter's net-worth may actually be higher (if @ $0.00).
----
However you want to define metrics / sources, when the majority of your citizens are living paycheck-to-paycheck, or not able to come up with $1000 for an emergency expense without going into debt — you live in a fiscally unhealthy society.
----
When the majority of US stocks transacted in 2025 were done in darkpool (i.e. not public) marketplaces your financial markets are no longer participating in daily public price discovery.
----
I am the black sheep [blue collar electrician] of my family (they're all "professionals" [lawyers, politicians, engineers]); we still maintain respectful conversational tones (mostly) but none of my many family members lives outside of Top 5% income brackets, so they absolutely do not live in the same world as a median income earner experiences (like me; perhaps not you?).
Perhaps there is a Top20%/80% line that it takes living beyond to actually experience the reality of wealth inequality. I've seen both sides — that's about where I'd place it.
----
Let's continue this discussion, but I only log on a few times a week. I appreciate attempting to understand different perspectives (share yours?).
I'm just curious: do you understand the difference between median and mean?
And why this might matter for more than just statistical purposes (i.e. what it means when inequality reaches extremes).