Your graph doesn't show anything about actual wages, or wages with the excluded non-wage compensation you're speaking of. GDP growth is not related to income g

Your graph doesn't show anything about actual wages, or wages with the excluded non-wage compensation you're speaking of. GDP growth is not related to income growth of normal people. For the last 20 years, something like 85% of the growth has gone to the very very rich. It was only really in the postwar period did the middle class ever really grow large (in that period of time we had the only factories in the world), and income growth has been pretty stagnant since the 80's. According to the US Census Bureau, the median is "considerably lower than the average, and provides a more accurate representation." "While the median household income has increased 30% since 1990, it has increased only slightly when considering inflation. In 1990, the median household income was $30,056 or $44,603 in 2003 dollars. " Sources: http://www.demographia.com/db-stateinc2000.htm http://www.demographia.com/db-stateinc2000.htm I bring you to the censuses conclusions about our largely stagnant american wages (which peaked in 1999): http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p60-226.pdf http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p60-226.pdf Most of that GDP is going to very very rich people.