According to conservatives, looking at the data on increasing income inequality is class warfare. It’s communism!
Since conservative policy programming has a Pareto-Optimal, utilitarian legitimacy (“lifting all boats with the rising tide”), the data tends to be dismissed as deliberately divisive and contrary to promoting domestic tranquility. The problem is then offered as the solution, like we have now, deliberating tax reform, with the verifiable legitimacy of the data missing.
Capitalists want to use the natural-model, self-assembled legitimacy of free-market mechanics to form credible political-economic arguments. At the same time, however, capitalists also want to ignore the effects of consolidating industry and markets to deliberately defeat the free-market mechanism. The result is extreme income inequality, which is then explained as something that “just happens,” naturally, by default (i.e., by the spontaneous, legitimate means of the self-assembly).
Free-market advocates (like myself) look at income-to-prices to indicate probable economic risk. Housing prices, and rents, continue to rise, for example, but the median income has not. The gap (which is the measurable occupation of space over time) indicates a probable risk dimension (which I refer to as the gamma-risk dimension). The measurable gap has everything to do with what is missing, but is actually still there, and (like Kant said) we are ALL obliged to it, categorically, self-assembled by natural design, always existing now, at present value, on demand.