income inequality

There are debates in the recent years that our income inequality is increasing. rich people is getting richer. Poor people is getting poorer. News on the wall street bankers' annual bonus is scary for an unemployed me. Obviously enough, those who care about income inequality are mostly the loser - the poors (aside some socialogists or policy makers). Since I am one of the loser, let me think about what is income inequality means to me.

A standard way to measure income inequality is Gini coefficient. Lets think about the following 2 situations:

There are 2 societies, A and B. Each one has 100 residents. Society A has 99 residents with $1 income per year, and 1 resident has $1 million per year. Societry B has 50 residents with $1 per year, and 50 residents has $20,000.98 per year. So, total income is the same for both countries.
The question here is which country you (as a poor one) want to stay? From the Gini coefficient sense, society A has higher inequality (pretty close to 1). So, from a Gini guy point of view, a poor may want to stay in society B. Is that really make sense?

Living in society A means that it is most likely the one you came across has the same status as you. Living in society B means every other resident you came across are way richer than you. For me, since I am one of the poor, I may prefer to stay in A. I prefer to meet with people with similar status.

So, income inequality is rising, but it is not the full picture. More important is the distribution of the wealth. If only 0.1% of the population accumulates 99.9% of the country's wealth, while 99.9% population have equal share of the rest, AND if the equal share of the rest is sufficient for a decent living, the society may not be too bad afterall.

Are we in such a society?