The Economist article tells us that the Chinese economy "has been growing so fast that, even though inequality is rising fast, extreme poverty is disappearing. China pulled 680m people out of misery in 1981-2010, and reduced its extreme-poverty rate from 84% in 1980 to 10% now."

To me, that is great news.

On this point, we can agree. The international goals to defeat extreme poverty have been exceeded in the last couple decades, probably beyond anyone's wildest dreams. This is the other side of free trade that progressives are loathe to talk about for some reason that is beyond me. There is no amount of charitable giving or foundation support that has had the kind of effect on poverty that increased trade has had. China hasn't really pulled 680m people out of poverty since '81; the US and EU have via offshoring manufacturing to the East.

But I also think that there is a relevant point to be bade about the share of national income that goes to labor and to capital. We know that there must exist an optimum. A simple thought experiment wherein one imagines either extreme show that neither could possibly work. The question is whether the optimum can be reached (if we agree that it should be reached, which is another debate entirely) naturally, or if it can only be attained through policy.