I don't know if that's exactly fair though. You could theoretically go all the way back to when there was nothing there and based on that anything would be a plus.
Where do you draw the line? When do you say that Disney added an enormous amount of items but don't seem to do much of that any more? When is it OK to set aside the amazing past and just look at the now or at least the recent past?
I see your point, and I understand what you mean, but that is where the subjectivity of this thread and this mindset as a whole comes into play. I look at what has been added since 1998 and see it as far outstripping what has been removed. For example, EMH and the dining plan were added after 1998! The fact that they have continued to evolve does not belie or negate the fact that they were additions post-1998.
Expedition Everest, Toy Story Midway Mania, Osborne Family Lights, Soarin', Test Track, Mission: Space, the Fantasy Land Expansion, multiple resorts, Magical Express, etc. have all happened since 1998, as well as many other additions, so it hasn't been 14 years of retrograde devolution, in my opinion.
The additional challenge is that as things mature, they will always evolve more slowly, and so arguments that only look at the "debit side" instead of both sides, in my opinion, do an injustice to the conversation. For example, I understand that WDW added a park about every 10 years, but that is an unsustainable model, so they have been adding parks around the world and focusing on other parks since that time. They do not want a fifth park in Orlando right now because there is no business purpose in adding one. Does that mean they are "cutting" or simply using good business sense? What about after five gates; would we need a 6th?
Can you imagine
ticket prices if they invested $25,000,000,000+ in a new park?
That is the counterargument that you saved me from making...and it is a valid one. Excellent
But to elaborate...you can't take the whole history and lump it as one because of the different periods in construction...
The reality is that WDW was in a state of continually development (though at varying rates based in a number of factors) from 1965 through the opening of the west side and animal kingdom in 97-98...and it has not been so since.
I'm not saying that's wrong...it's probably the right move...but that means you can't lump
It in with the expansion.
The reality is that the costs have and continue to rise above inflation, price index, and reasonable appreciation...each year barring economic collapses...and that why you must now ask if they are - in fact - cutting you.
And that was my point. Because make no
Mistake...you are paying for cruiseships, park bailouts, chinese trade deal negotiations (more Disneylands), and John Carter's...
You (we) are...and it is therefore your responsibility to ask if you are overpaying.
See the above. Things have changed since 1998, just evidently not in the way you have wanted them to, hence the subjective nature of your perspective. Disney Corporation is a global, multi-channel conglomerate, and if all you want them to focus on is another gate in Orlando, then I understand why you are dissatisfied, but unfortunately you're likely to remain that way for a while because there is no business purpose to adding a fifth gate. In Epcot alone, since 1998 they have added their three headliner rides in Soarin', Test Track and Mission: Space. That is change.
Also, to suggest that the parks are propping up all of WDW is wildly off-base. The cruise ships, Chinese parks, etc. are paying for themselves and for shareholder dividends, the same way ABC, ESPN, WDW, DLR, etc. are, as well. Yes, there have been disasters, but it's a multi-billion dollar corporation so it's not like they're pooling their pennies.
We're going to continue to disagree, of course, and that's fine, but your opinion, as well as mine, are just that--opinions.
Not to belittle the losses. Just trying to stay positive. 
