I'm with you. Investors/companies have to get into their heads that power transmission will never be as easy as data transmission. There's no power Wi-Fi, only some crude expensive approximations over mediocre distances with mediocre power levels. We could instead focus on improving
cables (and confined power in general) -- have them available everywhere, retractable, higher power. There's hardly any physical limit to confined power transmission; if you look at trends into the future you might expect device power consumption to actually rise a little, only furthering the divide. Cables are just so more elegant.
Part of the problem not discussed here is the 'Absorption conflict': for efficient power transmission you need materials that are able to absorb very well the given form of power; but at the same time you want nothing to interact in the path of the unconfined flux. This can only be dealt with up to a point, since our everyday objects' configuration and atomic composition are not so different from the composition of a receiver. This applies to all technologies: even for resonant EM power transfer you are relying on a specific conductor geometry; thankfully there's no strong conductor in our bodies, but you will have to deal with metal parts everywhere.
Wireless information gets around this kind of limitation because power ceases to important for the capacity of a channel [1] past a threshold (roughly when the signal PSD equals the noise PSD), while the determining factor is bandwidth. So you just use a few Ghz+ radiation and you have enormous bandwidth available; once that becomes insufficient we can move to Thz+ light; and so on without much environmental concerns (just medium concerns -- atmosphere gets opaque), since power levels will be kept constant or lower.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_capacity#Example_appli...