Isn't the answer far simpler? In a global economy, companies that operate at global scale - Amazon, Toyota, Samsung - will see outsized profits when compared to

Isn't the answer far simpler? In a global economy, companies that operate at global scale - Amazon, Toyota, Samsung - will see outsized profits when compared to local only businesses. The vast majority of such companies are located/headquartered/listed in/in/on US bases, leading to a two speed growth rate. Google makes > 50% of its revenue outside the USA. Here is Apples's percentage: https://www.statista.com/statistics/263435/non-us-share-of-apples-revenue/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/263435/non-us-share-of-a... Apple employs 123,000 people, 80,000 in the USA (best stats I could find). Google employs 80,000, and AFAIK over 50% are US based. So what we have are companies with a growth rate far in excess of US GDP as they create wealth from the world, with the majority going to US based employees and shareholders. Doesn't it just make sense that this leads to inequality? Those that work at global scale - and the locales that house such employees (READ: Bay Area) will have outsized results vs US centric businesses and locales.