Using either 1971 or 1974 as the basis for long-term comparisons would be more honest, but then the figures would not show what Mr. Krugman wants to show. Clearly, all income groups were substantially better off in 1989 than they were in 1979. When we look at 1993, which Mr. Krugman somehow neglects to do, it is also clear that real incomes were still well below those of 1989 in all income groups. The top two quintiles had higher real incomes in 1993 than in 1979, but lower than in 1989. Differences in schooling, age and number of workers explain most of the difference in lifetime incomes, which are substantially more equal than any snapshot picture of annual incomes.
Age alone explains much of the difference in wealth.
Wolff does say silly things like that, but his data do not. Unfortunately, that conclusion does not match any of Wolff's own numbers. But we can't ignore pensions. Ed Wolff's figures were patched together from several sources, some more incredible than others. The seemingly huge paper losses during the double-digit inflation were only experienced by those with the bad luck or poor judgement to sell at that time.