I won't be modest. I am gratified to discover that a paper I penned on inequality made its way into Matt Miller's Washington Post column last week. Mr Miller asks why rising inequality has not【C1】______America's least-favored classes to agitate for a【C2】______He agrees with my verdict: that access to【C3】______goods among the least well-off has ensured that material inequality is not as【C4】______as income inequality. 【C5】______modem conveniences have taken some of the【C6】______out of a relatively small income. This in turn has【C7】______the drive to seek causes of and cures for【C8】______'s discomfort. So the gap between rich and poor is sometimes less【C9】______, even if it is great and growing. Day-to-day experience is mostly a matter of our【C10】______circumstances, and if those are【C11】______enough, a widening gap in income, consumption or wealth is【C12】______to come often to our attention. Even if the abstract fact of rising inequality does come across our radar, it may【C13】______our sense of justice only if we've become convinced that inequality itself is【C14】______, or if we face related catastrophes. When I wrote the paper, official measures of income inequality had increased a good deal over the past few decades【C15】______consumption inequality seemed to have remained【C16】______New research suggests that consumption inequality has been increasing with income inequality【C17】______This may be true, but it seems【C18】______to the question of why America's poor aren't storming the barriers. The consumption data concerns how much we【C19】______, not how we experience what we buy, and that's the real issue. Even if we could agree that inequality in real standards of living is rising, this is not something we actually experience unless we are hungry, or【C20】______with the entertainments of our leisure.