Indeed. In fact, the footnote for that chart acknowledges that: > Income differences narrow when all taxes and transfers—such as health insurance and in-kind g

Indeed. In fact, the footnote for that chart acknowledges that: > Income differences narrow when all taxes and transfers—such as health insurance and in-kind government benefits—are included https://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications/the-region/where-has-all-the-income-gone https://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications/the-region/where... expounds on a few of the things that have caused household take-home pay to stagnate. The tl;dr there though is: > Average household size declined substantially during the past 30 years, so household income is being spread across fewer people. The mix of household types—married versus single, young versus old—also changed considerably, so the “median household” in 2006 looks quite different from the “median household” in 1976. Finally, the measure of income used by the Census Bureau to compute household income excludes some rapidly growing sources of income. Which is all to say that it's a bit more complex than a few charts might immediately make it look. Income inequality has certainly seen an increase, but it's incorrect to characterize it as the upper decile bleeding all the benefits out of the rest of the economy.