There’s a lot confusion as the whether wealth and income is declining or expanding tin this modern world.. n argument wig a friend I instanced our way f way of life — for most if us — in the agricultural era when wee were undernourished, underweight, under-aized peasants and smallholders of the agricultural era who had, by the 1770s or so, exploited every single yard of manually cultivable plot of land on the planet and living almost exclusively on a carbohydrate diet. This was good for energy but not for healthy immune systems. Even in early industrial times, 1914, with a newly augmented diet, only one quarter of the British male population were fit go army service
From fossil evidence, agricultural man was nowhere near as tall, well muscled and boned as modern man — that is the 20% elite of modern man , nor of his predecessors, hunter-gatherer man.
I think you ought to clarify your position regarding inequality of wealth. Due to he spread of information, both wealth and income differentials have been declining for thousands of years, the former always with lags, sometimes quite long ones. But there are always anomalies being thrown into the mix — innovations, government privileges, weird monetary experiments, war episodes — which perturbations take time to settle down again.
When all is said and dine, however, it isn’t egalitarianism at the end of the line because we are instinctively hieirarchical and will always exist in pecking orders, though hopefully more dependent on mutual respect and appreciation of skills than many of the ridiculous procedures that are used today,