Also, large and growing inequality is usually a symptom of a more deeper issue in an economy. Pushing to "fix inequality" is just patching a symptom, and proposed solutions usually involve giving more power to the state (which is probably the root of the inequality problem).
And modern "inequality" in Western economies is nothing compared to what it was in the past, hence my comment about absolute standard of living. Historically, inequality meant that the aristocracy rode around in carriages while the peasants walked barefoot. Now, the rich have fancy cars / jets, and the "poor" have cheap cars. But everyone has cars! (or access to mass transit for most Europeans -- I'm coming from a US-centric view).
Absolute standard of living has increased to an unbelievable level: 200 years ago, we worked outside on farms doing back-breaking labor from sunup to sundown. Now, a vanishingly small proportion works the farms, and even the tractors are air-conditioned. And absolute standard of living continues to rise for much of the world.
So what if there's inequality? We are so much better off than we have ever been, in absolute terms.
As you point out, current increases in inequality are symptoms of a bigger problem. The bigger problem (Govt debt, Fed money printing, and bank bailouts) needs to be addressed.
Trying to address inequality without tackling the root cause will do little - in most cases, since the "solutions" are more harmful govt/fed interventions, it will just make inequality worse.
Hand-wavy editorials about economic busts always come across half-baked and incoherent when they blame the "free market."
Inequality remains a massive red herring. Instead we should be concerned about the absolute standard of living and the level of corporate-government corruption.