Strange analysis. Globalization, automation, and feminization have all increased competition for breadwinners. Their wages are falling because of a glut of supply. Political solutions are necessary, but the uber-rich are not the problem.

The money has not been stolen or diverted, as this is not a zero-sum game. If incomes were more broadly distributed, is there any doubt that Amazon or any ad-based behemoth would be even more profitable? (So how are they "the winners"?) The wealth is concentrated because the rich have more bargaining power, but the money that the middle class lacks has not gone up to the 1%; it has simply not been created.

The rich would benefit from higher wages, but competitors cannot move unilaterally, and some marginal competitors would, indeed, be put out of business. Also, even if higher wages would create more wealth for the rich, their boat is hardly leaking, so why would they advocate taking the chance? The economics, however, seem clear: more financially stable workers equals more profitable customers.