I think that even if the charts showed a decline in the bottom quintile, Dexter's point needs to be considered. If our population increases by immigration, the bottom quintile will have a larger and larger pool of no-income people to start, skewing the charts. I'm not sure if they are included in the statistics though. Did the charts only include taxable income?

If population growth was neutral, would the story be different? I'd like to read something that explores this line of thought. Japan has a job surplus, right? I know in Minot, ND, starting wages for fast food workers is around $15 an hour. That's due to a surplus in jobs, mainly from the booming oil industry there. Perhaps the problem is that even though we're creating jobs, we're not creating them fast enough to compensate for increased population. But then, how do you control population growth in a humane manner?

one way to control the growth of a people would be what we have seen over the last 30 years, that is,
let people have smaller families in order to have more money for them selves.
of course these people don't know or care for that matter that they have been manipulated or even
have manipulated themselves into doing the bidding of some others, which is good right?. individual greed
is the one way to humanly control human growth. something in a way of example is the number of
children born per household, and the size of new homes.
if we look just one generation back we see larger families filling smaller houses, but today we see the
smaller families in larger homes suggesting a trend toward putting money and possession before
children.

I believe what has been said about growing wealth disparity to be true, it is getting worse.
I myself have had this on my mind since the occupy movement. it disturbs me, when I see such
hopelessness, I believe the people at the lower end have have a very tough fight ahead of them,
and I don,t know whether they are prepared for that fight. The type of social change were looking for
does not come cheap and easy. It will take total cooperation between all people affected, which
is part of the rub. How does one get a disparate group to shut down a system for even one business
cycle?. You see the answer is greed once again, the table has to be turned so that those who own
the wealth have no choice but to reconsider the idea of competitive wages. But the people at the lower income end have left themselves without enough savings to sustain any long-term boycott or strike.
Finally I can not agree that any real solution can be legislated alone because of the ability of business law
to counter act. All of us have to have skin in the game and fight to the last.