This is patently false. Inequality has been expanding since the 1970s, long before the "evil bank bailouts" and accommodative monetary policy of the 2010s Federal Reserve.
We do know these are all the same group of people, right? Same social strata, same schools, same manners, same wealth, same worldview, etc. Party makes little difference here -- R's and D's are just two right-wing parties who mainly serve special interests (industry). Clinton gutted working people as much as Reagan did -- wages continue to stagnate under allegedly liberal presidential administrations, too.
For all this to be true I don't even have to appeal to the fact that since the 70s the institutions we're talking about are all revolving doors facing each other -- work in government, then work in private industry, then back to government, then I'm Janet Yellen charging Goldman six figures for speeches but pretending they don't influence me.
It's a bit reductionist, maybe -- but by and large they're all the same people and they serve the same interests.
I'm not sure anyone would consider that "easy monetary policy."
Also, you do know that inflation and boom-and-bust cycles still happened while we were on the gold standard right?
I never characterized the Fed as an "evil puppet master" - that is an exaggeration. However, the Fed is certainly responsible for wealth inequality. It's a simple concept that is 100% backed by the financial and socioeconomic data:
- Rich people (small percent of population, i.e. "the 1%") own the vast majority of assets
- Fed is pumping massive amount of money into financial markets, which pumps up asset prices artificially
- Cost of living sky-rockets since the rich use their increased net worth to buy more assets, causing housing prices and other assets to skyrocket
- Purchasing power of the dollar to buy assets is severely decreased. Wages are stagnant but assets have skyrocketed. This causes feedback loops where the poor / middle-class don't have money to buy assets and the rich keep getting more money to buy more assets, hence runaway wealth inequality and social unrest.
No reason to have so much contempt against this argument. It's based on the evidence.