Core Insights - The article highlights the growing disparity between ordinary workers and capital holders in wealth accumulation, emphasizing that it now takes significantly more labor hours for an average worker to purchase a share of the S&P 500 index compared to 1971 [2][4]. Economic Factors - The era of loose monetary policy and low interest rates has inflated asset prices, with cheap capital flowing into stock and real estate markets rather than significantly increasing wages [6][8]. - Over the past 20 years, quantitative easing and money printing in the U.S. have led to soaring asset prices, while real wages have stagnated when adjusted for inflation [10][11]. Capital Returns - Historically, the return on capital tends to exceed economic growth rates and wage growth rates, leading to a widening gap between capital accumulation and labor income [12][13]. - From 1971 to 2024, the S&P 500 index surged from approximately 10 points to around 5000 points, a nearly 50-fold increase, while average weekly wages only increased tenfold from about $120 to $1200 [14][15]. Compounding Effects - An investment of $10,000 in the S&P 500 in 1971 would grow to about $500,000 by 2024, and with reinvested dividends, it could reach approximately $1.7 million, contrasting sharply with the modest growth of savings from wages [18][19]. Technological Impact - Technological advancements have created significant wealth but have also exacerbated the wealth gap, as high-skilled workers benefit more than low-skilled laborers [22][24]. - The technology sector has outperformed traditional service industries, further widening the wealth accumulation gap [25][26]. Globalization and Industry Disparities - High-return industries like technology and finance have consistently outperformed traditional sectors, contributing to wealth inequality [28]. - Globalization has pressured wages in developed countries, as capital seeks lower costs while local labor faces increased competition [30][31]. Barriers to Wealth Accumulation - The efficiency of converting labor income into passive income has decreased, with the required market value of the S&P 500 to replace annual salary rising from 25 times in 1971 to about 33 times in 2024 [33]. - The time needed to accumulate passive income equivalent to one year’s salary has increased from approximately 16 years in 1971 to about 25 years in 2024 [34]. Investment Strategy - Ordinary individuals are encouraged to recognize the importance of combining wage income with capital income to navigate the growing wealth gap [36][38].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the phenomenon of "involution" in China, attributing it to the country's transformation into an "economic machine" since the reform and opening-up in 1980, driven by GDP-centric performance evaluations and competition with foreign brands [2][3]. Group 1: Economic Machine and Involution - China has become an economic machine characterized by societal mobilization for economic gain, with a focus on GDP as a performance metric for local governments [2]. - The first phase of this economic machine involved domestic brands competing against foreign brands across various industries, leading to a focus on import substitution [2]. - Post-2018, the U.S. redefined China as a strategic competitor, prompting the need for China to enhance its economic capabilities, particularly in technology and manufacturing sectors [3]. Group 2: Strategies and Outcomes - The strategy of "involution" was adopted to foster competitiveness in emerging industries like electric vehicles, renewable energy, and semiconductor manufacturing, with local governments providing support to their enterprises [3]. - This approach aims to produce a few highly competitive companies that can dominate international markets, despite the high number of failures among supported firms [3]. - The article argues that this internal competition has significantly increased efficiency, although it raises concerns about fairness and social balance [3]. Group 3: Fairness and Distribution - The government has implemented policies to ensure relative fairness, such as maintaining public ownership and monopolies in critical industries, which do not participate in involution [4]. - The distribution system in China is portrayed as more equitable than that of the U.S., with various social welfare programs aimed at improving living standards and reducing poverty [5]. - The article emphasizes that the current system, which combines state capitalism in production with socialist principles in distribution, is superior in addressing social issues compared to the U.S. model [5].