This is easy to explain. Stocks prices are in large part dictated by corporate profits, which is not the same as GDP. Profits are returned to shareholders, GDP is not.
> Stocks prices are in large part dictated by corporate profits
I've also worked for a company with negative profits and a positive stock price which is also one of those things that tends to confuse me. (I'm aware that I'm pretty obtuse, but it's not all an act - I really don't get how much of the modern economy works.) I understand that the expectation is that profits will turn positive/grow over time, but that would seem to require the ability to accurately forecast the future, which seems problematic.
Way too much of the modern economy looks to me like the South Park "Underwear Gnomes" model which you see memeified sometimes - the step 1: steal underpants, step 2: ?, step 3: profit, thing.
They predicted that companies will be able to extract more value from workers in the future. In other words, they think that the top 1% will continue to get relatively richer at a faster rate, as long as that is true profits can improve without the economy improving.
The 2% economic growth rate is an average. It might be the case that the average worker's real wage grows 0% (this is basically true [1]), while corporate profits, which make up ~10% of the U.S. economy [2], grow 20%/year.
.png){kind=link}