Income inequality is a very popular topic these days. However, the whole issue is largely a red herring. Aside from the fact that, in the US anyway, income inequality is measured before taxes and transfers (meaning before things like tax breaks or WIC/Food Stamps/etc are taken into account), one’s standard of living is measured not by his income, but rather his consumption.
Imagine, if you will, a man named Doof invents a machine, the Utopia-inator. The Utopia-inator lives up to its name. By inserting just a single dollar into the machine per day, a person can receive anything he wants. All the dollars go to Doof. Doof, in a moment of inspired kindness, gives one of these machines to every single person on the planet. Doof now receives $7 billion in income per day. In this scenario, income inequality is highly unequal. Question: would this scenario be better or worse than current day? The obvious answer is better: everyone now has the same standard of living despite the fact income inequality is so high!
Now, you may object that my scenario is outlandish. It is done to an extreme to prove the point, but it is also true in this world as well. Despite rising income inequality, people of all classes, and especially the poor, are living better and better in America.
In the end, the way to combat poverty is not to make everyone equal, but to make consumption cheaper. Taking from one group to give to another will not accomplish that; all it will do is breed anger and distrust and greed. But markets, free markets, will accomplish this.