I don’t think that makes the argument you think it does. Wealth concentration is even more extreme.

The point is that his original claim is either incorrect, or is not supported by the source he cited.

That doesn’t logically follow. If the claim is 1% control 80%.

And the counter argument is wealth is different than income the implication is that wealth inequality is 1) lower than income inequality and 2) more important for some unspecified reason.

But if wealth inequality is more extreme then that means 1% control GREATER than 80% of wealth. So point 1 is false. And point 2 is most likely irrelevant because greater concentration likely means whatever harm from one category would track the other category

Bigger picture truths don't justify smaller picture lies.

The linked view of the chart is distributed by income percentile, the title is "Wealth by income percentile"

>The linked view of the chart is distributed by income percentile, the title is "Wealth by income percentile"

That's still measuring wealth, not income. The correct statement to draw from the chart is that top 1% by income have nearly as much wealth as the bottom 80%.

the only difference is whether or not its realized, no? they're using wealth to avoid that