Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.
•••
Wealth and income inequality have recently gone down in the U.S. and other parts of the West. The decline has been going on for the better part of the last decade. Yet it is not clear, to me at least, whether this is something to celebrate.
The recent decrease in inequality should come as no surprise. Markets are well below their late 2021 levels, and the wealthy hold a disproportionate share of the stock market. Executive compensation also tends to move with the markets, which affect the wealth of founders such as Mark Zuckerberg, who according to one measure has lost about three-quarters of his peak net wealth. And then there are all those former crypto billionaires.
At the lower end of the income scale, the picture is more complex. But the labor market has yet to crash, the current unemployment rate is 3.7%, and there are signs of an inflationary soft landing. Over the third quarter of 2022, the bottom 50% saw real incomes rise an average of 1.5%.
None of those narratives are finished — but for the less affluent matters could be worse.
I am not here to shed tears for the very wealthy or to argue that the bottom half doesn't need more help. I would merely observe that lesser wealth and narrowing income inequality have not brought new glories to the world.
Of course poorer people would be better off if they had more money, and we should enact policies to help bring that about. But critics of inequality make a different and much stronger set of claims, saying that inequality is responsible for health problems, despair, bad governance and social unrest. Those arguments — focusing on inequality rather than poverty — are an essential part of the current critique of capitalism.