[creer]

My point was that this anger itself seems rooted in media and agitation / political movements. Anger (= news headlines) sells news subscriptions, anger sells votes (or something).

Like many pointed out here, this "43%" was nothing special this year if, for example, you are mid-career and have moderately aggressive stock market participation. It's an example of headline entirely cooked up for agitation.

[Jochim]

You're in your own bubble if you think 43% is close to normal for the majority of the population.

[creer]

> majority of the population

You are right, it's not the majority of the population. The fine article was trying to raise indignation at the wealth increase of "the 25 richest families in the world", using seemingly gross numbers that they militarized without even noticing that these numbers were completely unremarkable. Or perhaps in bad faith altogether.