What does "It" refer to in your comment? The article does not mention wage growth; I'm the one who suggested that adding wage growth to the chart might be interesting and informative.
I would encourage you to research the amazing difference between Republican and Democratic administrations when it comes to economic performance in general. Democratic administrations economic performance is always massively better. The differences are stark, where Democratic policies encourage both GDP and wage growth. They hold true across all major economic indicators, such as gross domestic product, employment, incomes, productivity, even stock prices. It’s true if you examine only the precise period when a president is in office, or instead assume that a president’s policies affect the economy only after a lag and don’t start his economic clock until months after he takes office. The gap “holds almost regardless of how you define success,” two economics professors at Princeton, Alan Blinder and Mark Watson, write. They describe it as “startlingly large.” The reason is very simple. Republicans have spent years wedded to austerity economics while Democrats are explicitly dedicated to job growth for the middle class and high taxes on the rich. Republicans continue their austerity policies as well as adopting policies aimed at making life easier for corporations and the wealthy. Democrats, by contrast, continue to focus on the poor and the working class.
The point is it doesn't matter. You can do the analysis however you choose. It's incontrovertible. We are all poorer because of austerity economics ... even the billionaires.