This article is part of "The America We Need," a Times Opinion series exploring how the nation can emerge from this crisis stronger, fairer and more free. Read the introductory editorial and the editor’s letter.

America’s economy has almost doubled in size over the last four decades, but broad measures of the nation’s economic health conceal the unequal distribution of gains. A small portion of the population has pocketed most of the new wealth, and the coronavirus pandemic is laying bare the consequences of the unequal distribution of prosperity. Consider first the most commonly quoted measure of the nation’s success — gross domestic product — in the chart below:







G.D.P. measures a country’s total output. In the U.S., it has risen 79 percent since 1980, after adjusting for inflation and population growth. Over the same 40 years, the after-tax income of the bottom half of earners has risen only 20 percent ... The after-tax income of earners near the middle has also badly trailed G.D.P., rising only 50 percent... But for the very wealthy, the story is completely different. Their after-tax incomes have risen much faster than G.D.P. — up 420 percent since 1980.

Inequality didn’t cause the coronavirus crisis. But it is making the crisis much worse, having created an economy in which many Americans are struggling to get by, and are vulnerable to any interruption of work or income and any illness. On this page, we present dozens of ways to look at American life that together provide a more meaningful picture than G.D.P. There is reason to expect that many of these indicators are already beginning to look worse, as the country grapples with both a pandemic and a recession. Together, they also help show the areas in which Americans will struggle to recover from this crisis.

Incomes have stagnated. But not for the rich.

One way to think about the rise in inequality is to imagine how different the economy would be if inequality hadn’t soared over the past 40 to 50 years. In that scenario, with the same G.D.P. that we have today but with 1980 levels of inequality, every American household in the bottom 90 percent of income would be earning about $12,000 more — not just this year, but permanently.

In effect, each household in this bottom 90 percent is sending a check for $12,000 to every household in the top 1 percent, year after year after year.

Since Jan. 1, 2011, a family in the bottom 90 percent has effectively given the rich ...

The stagnation of income for most Americans has caused a sharp decline in arguably the most salient definition of economic progress: Do you earn more than your parents did at the same age?

The answer was yes for 92 percent of Americans born in 1940. Even if they had to cope with unemployment, divorce, illness or another financial challenge, almost all grew up to out-earn their parents (controlling for inflation). Among Americans born in 1980, however, the share was only 50 percent. Living the American dream is now akin to a coin flip.

Born in 1940? You would almost definitely make more than your parents. Chance of making more than your parents if born in... 1940 92% 1950 79 1960 62 1970 61 1980 Born in 1980? You only had a 50-50 chance of making more than your parents. 50 Source: “The Fading American Dream: Trends in Absolute Income Mobility Since 1940” (See notes) ai2html-settings settings_version: 0.100.0 image_format: auto write_image_files: true responsiveness: fixed max_width: output: one-file png_number_of_colors: 128 jpg_quality: 60 use_lazy_loader: true show_completion_dialog_box: true last_updated_text: headline: leadin: summary: notes: sources: credit: By The New York Times show_in_compatible_apps: true display_for_promotion_only: false constrain_width_to_text_column: false size: full scoop_asset_id: scoop_username: scoop_slug: scoop_external_edit_key: Born in 1940? You would almost definitely make more than your parents. Chance of making more than your parents if born in... 1940 92% 1950 79 1960 62 1970 61 1980 50 Born in 1980? You only had a 50-50 chance of making more than your parents. Source: “The Fading American Dream: Trends in Absolute Income Mobility Since 1940” (See notes)

Another way to see how inequality has skyrocketed: The changing ratio between the pay of C.E.O.s and the pay of typical workers:

Executive pay packages have skyrocketed CEO-to-worker compensation ratio 300 200 100 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Source: Economic Policy Institute Executive pay packages have skyrocketed CEO-to-worker compensation ratio 300 278 200 100 0 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Source: Economic Policy Institute

Over this same period, taxes on the wealthy have also fallen much more than for any other group.

Boomers are richer. The rest are poorer.

The trends on wealth are, if anything, starker.

In 2016 the median American household had a lower net worth — about 30 percent lower — than the median household in 2007. How could this be, given the bull market during much of that period? The answer is that most Americans own little or no stock. Their main asset is their home.

Boomers have accumulated more than half of all household wealth Share of household wealth, by age of generation's median cohort Baby Boomers 50% 40 30 20 Generation X 10 Millennials 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 years old Source: Federal Reserve, based on work by Gray Kimbrough Boomers have accumulated more than half of all household wealth Share of household wealth, by age of generation's median cohort Baby Boomers 50% 40 30 20 Gen. X 10 Millennials 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 years old Source: Federal Reserve, based on work by Gray Kimbrough

The affluent, of course, do tend to own stock, and the median net worth of the richest 10 percent of households rose 13 percent from 2007 to 2016 (the last year for which the Fed has released data).

Those with the most wealth saw gains since 2007 Change in net worth over 2007-2016, by percentile 90th percentile of net worth +13% -15 75th percentile -30 Median household -37 25th percentile Everyone else is worse off Source: Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances Those with the most wealth saw gains since 2007 Change in net worth over 2007-2016, by percentile 90th percentile of net worth +13% -15 75th percentile -30 Median household -37 25th percentile Everyone else is worse off Source: Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances

The trends are similar over the long term.

Whose net worth increased the most? The rich Change in median net worth since 1989 Richest 10% 80% 60 40 20 All families 0 -20 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 Note: 2016 dollars. Source: Kaiser Family Foundation Whose net worth increased the most? The rich Change in median net worth since 1989 80% Richest 10% 60 40 20 All families 0 -20 1989 1995 2001 2007 2013 Source: Kaiser Family Foundation

Overall, the richest 0.1 percent of American households own 19.6 percent of the nation’s total wealth, up from 15.9 percent in 2005 and 7.4 percent in 1980. The richest 0.1 percent now have the same combined net worth as the bottom 85 percent.

The wealth trends have been especially hard on younger Americans. The median net worth of Americans under age 35 — who started off substantially poorer on average than older Americans — is 40 percent lower than the net worth of Americans under 35 was in 2004. The net worth of Americans over age 65, by contrast, has risen 9 percent over the same period. The Boomers, in short, are richer than their predecessors, and Millennials and Generation X are poorer than their predecessors.

No generation has seen their net worth grow quite like older Americans Change in median net worth since 1989 65 and older +50% 55–64 0 <35 45–54 35–44 -50% 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 Younger Americans have less wealth than in the past Source: Kaiser Family Foundation No generation has seen their net worth grow quite like older Americans Change in median net worth since 1989 65 and older +50% 55–64 0 <35 45–54 35–44 -50% 2001 1989 1995 2007 2013 Younger Americans have less wealth than in the past Source: Kaiser Family Foundation

Racial inequities have also widened. The median wealth of white households is now 10 times higher than the median wealth of black households. In 1992, the multiple was seven to one.

White Americans have seen their net worth climb Median net worth White non-Hispanic $150K 100 But it’s barely budged for black Americans 50 Black non-Hispanic 0 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 Note: 2016 dollars. Source: Kaiser Family Foundation White Americans have seen their net worth continue to climb Median net worth $150K White non-Hispanic 100 50 Black non-Hispanic 0 1995 2001 2007 2013 1989 But it’s barely budged for black Americans Note: 2016 dollars. Source: Kaiser Family Foundation

The rich live longer than the rest.

The trends in health and life expectancy are also deeply worrisome.

Rich and poor Americans used to have fairly similar lifespans. Now, however, Americans in the bottom fourth of the income distribution die about 13 years younger on average than those in the top fourth.

Life expectancy has actually fallen for some lower-income Americans Life expectancy at age 50 among men Born in 1930 Born in 1960 Lowest income But the rich added more than seven years Low Middle High Highest income 75 years old 80 85 90 Life expectancy at age 50 among women Born in 1930 Born in 1960 Lowest income Rich women can expect to live over 90 Low Middle High Highest income 75 years old 80 85 90 Source: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Life expectancy has actually fallen for some lower-income Americans Life expectancy at age 50 among men Born in 1930 Born in 1960 Lowest income Low Middle High Highest income 75 years old 80 85 90 But the rich added more than seven years Life expectancy at age 50 among women Lowest income Low Middle High Highest income 75 years old 80 85 90 Rich women can expect to live over 90 Source: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

No other rich country has suffered such slow growth in life expectancy. In 1980, Americans lived roughly as long as the British and French did. Not anymore:

Life expectancy at birth Japan 84 Italy Switzerland France Canada 82 Germany 80 United States 78 China 76 Brazil Saudi Arabia 74 The United States spends more on health care than any other country, but the life expectancy is falling 72 Ukraine Russian Federation 70 India 68 66 Health expenditure per capita Gabon Marshall Islands 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 $10,000 Afghanistan Papua New Guinea Congo, Rep. Note: Current health expenditure per capita, purchasing power parity, reflects current international dollars. Both measures span 2000-2017. Source: World Bank Life expectancy at birth Japan Switzerland 84 Canada 82 Germany 80 United States 78 China 76 Saudi Arabia 74 The United States spends more on health care than any other country, but the life expectancy is falling 72 70 India 68 66 Health expenditure per capita Gabon Marshall Islands 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 $10,000 Note: Current health expenditure per capita, purchasing power parity, reflects current international dollars. Both measures span 2000-2017. Source: World Bank

One cause: The uniquely expensive and inefficient medical system in the United States. Treatments, procedures and drugs all cost more than in other countries. Those premiums lift the incomes of companies and people in the health care sector, but they come at the expense of other Americans.

Low-income Americans are less likely to have health insurance Share without health insurance, by income 22% $20k - $40k 22 >$40k 9 Share without health insurance, by education Less than high school 30% High school 17 Some college 11 College graduate 5 Same for people who didn’t graduate from high school Source: Kaiser Family Foundation Low-income Americans are less likely to have health insurance Share without health insurance, by income 22% $20k - $40k 22 >$40k 9 Share without health insurance, by education Less than high school 30% High school 17 Some college 11 College graduate 5 Same for people who didn’t graduate high school Source: Kaiser Family Foundation

Another reason for the widening gap is “deaths of despair” — from suicide, alcoholism and drug abuse. The rate of these deaths among American adults (ages 25 to 64) without a four-year college degree has nearly tripled since the early 1990s. More now die from these causes than from cancer.

For Americans with a college degree, the “deaths of despair” rate has risen only modestly over the same period — and is now less than one-fourth as high as it is for people without a degree.

Those without a college degree die more often from “deaths of despair” They also drink more than college grads Average number of drinks (on days when drinking) among non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 “Deaths of despair” per 100,000 non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 Non- college 2.5 100 2.0 50 1.5 College grads 0 1.0 1992 2016 1994 2016 Source: “Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism” by Anne Case and Angus Deaton. Those without a college degree die more often from “deaths of despair” Non- college 100 50 College grads 0 1992 2016 “Deaths of despair” per 100,000 non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 They also drink more than college grads Non- college 2.5 2.0 College grads 1.5 1.0 1994 2016 Average number of drinks (on days when drinking) among non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 Source: “Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism” by Anne Case and Angus Deaton.

Smoking rates have fallen much more for the affluent than the poor. Only 7 percent of adults with income above $100,000 smoke. About 14 percent of adults with income between $35,000 and $100,000 smoke, as do 21 percent with income below $35,000.

Who still smokes? Mostly those with lower incomes Smokes “every day” or “some days”, by household income 21% $35k–75k 15 $75k–$100k 13 >$100k 7 Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Who still smokes? Mostly those with lower incomes Smokes “every day” or “some days”, by household income 21% $35k–75k 15 $75k–$100k 13 >$100k 7 Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Daily life has also become significantly harder for Americans on the wrong side of the class divide. The chronic-pain gap has widened, with about 60 percent of adults without a college degree experiencing neck, back or joint pain.

Those without a college degree say they feel more pain Share of non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 experiencing neck, back or joint pain Non-college 60% 50 College grads 40 30 1998 2016 Source: “Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism” by Anne Case and Angus Deaton. Those without a college degree say they feel more pain Share of non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 experiencing neck, back or joint pain Non- college 60% 50 College grads 40 30 1998 2016 Source: “Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism” by Anne Case and Angus Deaton.

And a larger share of Americans — especially men — are not working than in the past. Many of them aren’t looking for work, which means they aren’t counted as officially unemployed. The group includes former factory workers who have not been able to find decent-paying new jobs.

A smaller share of men are working today Work force participation, individuals aged 25-54 100% Men 80 Women 60 40 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis A smaller share of men are working today Work force participation, individuals aged 25-54 100% Men 80 Women 60 40 ‘70 ‘80 ‘90 ‘00 ‘10 1960 Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

The decline of labor unions plays a role in many of these trends. Without collective bargaining, many workers struggle to receive wages that keep up with the growth of their company’s profits. Many also feel less connected to their company and to their colleagues than they once did.

Union membership rates of employed wage and salary workers 20% 15 10 Union membership has plummeted 5 0 1990 2000 2010 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Union membership rates of employed wage and salary workers 20% 15 10.5% 10 Union membership has plummeted 5 0 1990 2000 2010 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Family life has diverged

A greater share of children in the United States live with only one parent — 23 percent — than in any other country.

Nearly a quarter of American kids live in single-parent homes Share of children under age 18 in single-parent households United States 23% United Kingdom 21 Russia 18 Sweden 18 Denmark 17 France 16 Netherlands 16 Source: Pew Research Center Nearly a quarter of American kids live in single-parent homes Share of children under age 18 in single-parent households United States 23% United Kingdom 21 Russia 18 Sweden 18 Denmark 17 France 16 Netherlands 16 Source: Pew Research Center

The trend has been driven mostly by the rise of single-parent families among the middle class and poor.

Mothers with a bachelor’s degree are far more likely to be married Children in married households, by mother’s level of education 90% Mother had a bachelor’s degree 80 High school or some college 70 Less than high school 60 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Source: IFS Mothers with a bachelor’s degree are far more likely to be married Children in married households, by mother’s level of education 90% Mother had a bachelor’s degree 80 High school or some college 70 Less than high school 60 ‘85 1980 ‘90 ‘00 ‘10 Source: IFS

About 77 percent of upper-income Americans between the ages of 25 and 55 are married. Only 29 percent of low-income Americans are.

Make a lot of money? You’re far more likely to be married Share married, by income level High income 77% Middle 58 Low income 29 Source: American Community Survey, 2018 Source: American Community Survey, 2018 Make a lot of money? You’re far more likely to be married Share married, by income level High income 77% Middle 58 Low income 29 Source: American Community Survey, 2018

Educational outcomes have diverged too

There has been a surge of college-going among children from all economic groups over the last few decades. But there has not been a surge in the share of lower- and middle-income students who graduate from college.

Many of those who fail to finish college end up with the miserable combination of student debt and no degree. The number of higher-income students who finish college, however, has risen sharply.

Wealthy students are more likely to graduate Share with degrees, by income quintile 60% Highest income 40 High Middle 20 Low Lowest income 0 Born in 1970 Born in 1980 But that number has barely changed for lower-income students Source: Fabian Pfeffer, “Growing Wealth Gaps in Education,” the journal Demography. Wealthy students are more likely to graduate Share with degrees, by income quintile 60% Highest income 40 High Middle 20 Low Lowest income 0 Born in 1970 Born in 1980 But that number has barely changed for lower-income students Source: Fabian Pfeffer, “Growing Wealth Gaps in Education,” the journal Demography.

Research has consistently shown that the benefits of college — in terms of income, health and happiness — are large, but that those benefits accrue overwhelmingly to graduates rather than to people who merely earn some credits.

One reason for the growing inequality in college graduation has been sharp cuts in states’ spending on higher education. These cuts have left colleges with fewer resources and also led to big tuition increases, even after taking financial aid into account.

Net college price (tuition, fees, room and board) $15.4k $15k College is only getting more expensive 10 5 0 1992 ‘94 ‘96 ‘98 2000 ‘02 ‘04 ‘06 ‘08 2010 ‘12 ‘14 ‘16 ‘18 2020 Note: For public four-year in-state colleges. Source: CollegeBoard Net college price (tuition, fees, room and board) $15.4k $15k 10 College is only getting more expensive 5 0 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Note: For public four-year in-state colleges. Source: CollegeBoard

Given all of this, it makes sense that so many Americans have soured on their own country. For almost 20 years, through economic booms and busts and through presidencies of both parties, most Americans have said the country was headed in the wrong direction.

They’re right about that.