Other answers have brought up communism... and tried to argue about it, but anyone who knows about it should know that it's incomplete. It's more like a "wouldn't it be nice" idea that isn't actually a system and isn't well thought out... and the "wouldn't it be nice" parts quickly change to "omg this creates a hell hole" when you start actually figuring out a system to do what the communist ideal is. It also quickly shows that what is needed to create and maintain a communist system makes it not a communist system.
But moving on beyond that there is a single line that can lead you to the rest of what you need to know and that is, "Many things are only valuable in the hands of certain people." To me, gold is worthless as anything other than a paperweight and to trade to someone else. I can't use it to make electronic components nor jewelry. Both of which I may want and so to make sure there is enough electronic components and jewelry in the world I would sell that off pretty quickly, especially since gold is heavy. Uranium is heavy and radioactive as are a good number of other elements that I'd be stuck with which I wouldn;t want around me in most cases.
Even if I recognize the value of something, if I can't use it, then it loses value for me, but there is a worse effect to this. You're now wasting resources by too many people competing or producing their own versions which makes these resources more scarce and of differing quality making it so there can't be standardization which again wastes resources. Instead of having a few standardized sources that use the resources en masse these resources are being sent to everyone which costs time and management which then are sold to a centralized place for low value because I don't value crude oil, for example, but the standard gas is in such low supply (because lots of people are hording it to try to make their own or just can't transport it) and we're wasting it all over, that the price rockets up.
In other words, Distributing equally wastes resources and makes the situation worse overall which causes the poor to maybe be marginally richer presently, but in a worse condition overall and long term.
There are ways around this, not communism though, and definitely not true equal distribution. But lets say everything works out and everyone gets an equal share of all the resources... Well ok, but I don't need these, so I sell that off. And billions of other people do the same and that results more or less back at where we are so we redistribute again and again. This doesn't fix the problem. All it does is drain resources and causes people to be unmotivated because they're having their work nullified.
Also there is the problem that you have divested the ultimate authority of companies of people who have a profit motive into the hands of CEOs who aren't terribly moral or smart nor do they care about profits any more because they no longer answer to anyone and they don't have a profit motive for themselves either so even assuming everything goes perfect you are still left with the fact that you end up with worse quality of things even if everything continues to run.
I could layout a much better economic system, but that would be off topic and you can't ask anywhere on here so ^.^ Anyways, to understand economics you should pick up Heinlein's book "For us, the living; A comedy of customs" It's a great read and has a brilliant economics lesson in there.