Something that I don't think gets enough attention. The huge spike in income inequality in the US closely corresponds to a huge shift in US monetary policy. Starting with Greenspan, the Federal Reserve underwent a much more expansionist monetary policy in the 80s, and got really aggressive after the 1987 crash. They never really stopped. Things got absurd following the 2001 recession (0% and negative interest rates made their first appearance then). Easy money slowed a bit in 2003-2004 but then went full force when the housing bubble burst, and now, with quantitative easing, the Fed is creating so much new money we are in uncharted waters. What I've noticed is that the big spike in income inequality matches this easy money policy quite closely. And it makes sense that it would. When the Fed creates new money, they do so through the banks, who then can either: a) invest the new money in assets b) loan out the new money Either a or b results in greater income inequality. If you are an asset holder, the value of your assets increases when new money gets created. If you are not an asset holder, the only way you can become one is through credit, and new credit enriches those who have the money to lend. With all this hubbub about the 1% these past few years, I'm surprised this has never come up. Could it be the reason the rich are getting richer is because the Fed is enriching them and nobody else? I'd be curious to know what others think.