We should consider the likely alternative - Americans are actually pretty nice to each other, all things considered. It is really quite impressive what American grass roots organisations can do if people let them. Trust in institutions is low because the institutions are being exposed to the harsh light of Very Good Communication and it turns out that bodies that rule by decree are kinda corrupt. That should shock people, but it doesn't represent a radical change in the status quo.
There are serious economic headwinds that someone needs to do something about.
I assume you're coming from the direction that economy first fixes the social issues. That's a valid view but I'm not sure it tackles inequality. No point in a bigger economy if only a few at the top benefit.
"Tackling inequality" comes from reading too many say-nothing articles by Mr. Brooks and not enough time spent reflecting on what we should be trying to do to get the best result for people.
We should not care how much money a neighbour has. In fact, the more the better. I don't want to have to offer them charity if there is an option for them to stand on their own. They could be billionaires next door for all I care and that doesn't harm me or anyone else in the city.
Inequality is one of a number of fake issues that are major unhelpful distractions. The focus should be on median and low living standards.
What you describe doesn't seem to be at odds with what I think of as the inequality problem - a larger proportion of economic value going to folks doing the work rather than the capital investors. It might not even be that drastic a change for that to have real effects over time, and the rich would still be rich.
Rings true.