Thread by @HBoushey

For example, since 1980, aggregate national income grew an avg. of 1.3% annually, but this growth went disproportionately to the wealthiest—

The top 10% saw their incomes rise by 2%,

the top 1% saw theirs rise by 2.9%,

& the bottom 90% saw their incomes rise by just 1%. 7/n

And across recent recessions and expansions, data show the top 10% of earners have taken around 50% of all economic growth. 8/n

This lopsided pattern of growth has serious downstream consequences—

Raj Chetty @HarvardEcon et al have shown, mobility has declined precipitously in the US, and 2/3 of this decline can be attributed to unequal patterns of growth. equitablegrowth.org/the-fading-ame… 9/n

The metrics that policymakers use to evaluate the US economy are reflective of what type of success we, as a nation, value.

If strong, stable & broad-based economic growth is important, then policymakers need to align policies with those values. nytimes.com/2018/09/14/opi… 10/n

Recently, @SenSchumer, @MartinHeinrich & @RepMaloney introduced legislation to measure who actually prospers when the economy grows, an acknowledgement that GDP growth is no longer a sufficient measure for understanding the health of our economy. vox.com/policy-and-pol… 11/n

Distributional measures of growth—what @equitablegrowth calls #GDPv2—will help policymakers design policies aimed at raising output while reducing the huge gap between the very rich and the rest of America. equitablegrowth.org/gdp-2-0-measur… 12/n

As I lay out in my book #UnboundEcononmy, inequality is obstructing, subverting & distorting our economy.

One of the most important things we can do to fight inequality in the United States right now is to start keeping track of it. newyorker.com/news/our-colum… 13/n

But until we change the way we conceptualize, and therefore measure, economic prosperity, we are unlikely to have very much of it.

In short, better, fairer growth measures beget better, fairer growth. theguardian.com/commentisfree/… /end