And this is not inequality?
Honestly though, its been far more clear to me living and working in a country with much better income inequality how much the state of some places having rampant poverty and other places in the same country having massive profits. It seems like a cliché to say, but how is it that in the country with the highest average salary in the world there is so much poverty?
It's because there is a much sharper distribution: the wealthy few make far far more in america than they ever do in europe, but everybody else is better off.
The sharpness of this curve is what indecates inequality to me. I'm sure there are all sorts of fancy ways economists have quantified this, along with economic mobility (also shockingly low in the supposed land where anyone can make it)
Rather, a bunch of people have incomes that are below or precariously close to the carrying and maintenance costs on the cheapest possible shelter. You can tell that this is a poverty problem and not an inequality problem because the situation is worse, not better, if everyone falls down to that level. (Example: we might be legitimately better off in a world where no one is a billionaire, because billionaires have access to outsized political power that can harm other people. Money in politics is an inequality problem. I don't think you can say we're better off in a world where no one can securely afford good housing).
And if we look at places in the world that deal more successfully with such low economic productivity, one of things you'll find is a regulatory bar for "minimum viable shelter" that's more in line with what people living there can afford.