Assuming ..., the plan

Assuming people are knowing the problem, namely super-extreme pay injustice, causing myriad problems, including ever-escalating violence, causing myriad miseries for all humans at all levels, and pushing us closer to the terminal point.
The plan.
To introduce the simplest way of redistributing wealth justly back to the earners, which might be making everyone in the world the heirs of large deceased estates. The private heir has done nothing to make that money, everyone has done everything to make that money, so that way is just, and it is easy to show that it is just. This permits overpay for one generation, which does minimal damage, and stops the endless accumulation of overfortune over many generations, which does 99% of the damage. This requires no measurement of fortunes. Large estates are simply divided equally among all people, and electronically directly transmitted to all accounts. Everyone to have one account into which these monies are paid. This will cause most of the thin but terribly tall needle of overpay to shower back down on people in two generations, 50 years. There is no need to distinguish the overpaid and not give them an equal share, because that would be very costly of labour and money, and because the overpaid are being trimmed at death anyway.
The way to do it is simple once there is a will to do it. In order to do this, we need to create first a universal human will to do it. We have to demonstrate that justice is good. We have to define precisely to people's satisfaction what is justice, what is equal pay for equal work, what is work and what is not work, and why we pay for work and not for other things. We have to bring every adult to clear and adequate ideas of the enormous benefit of pay justice for every human being. There are three billion adults to reach, but three billion adults to reach them, with all their resources, energy and talents. This is not propaganda, indoctrination, but invitation to see an overlooked reality. Like seeing the value of having insurance, of having a law against murder. There was a time before those ideas, and there was a time when people took those new ideas on board, and decided they liked them, and then the ways to have them soon followed on the will to have them. If each person who 'gets' this idea teaches it to just two people, chosen from their closest friends, every adult in the world will get it in just 31 times the time it takes for two people to get it. If people can be taught, if people teach it, it will be taught. In the same way the news gets around about a new film. We have used force for millenia and force has not worked. People who use force to teach ideas are usually trying to teach wrong ideas, ideas that are not in people's interests. True ideas have reason behind them, and if people can grasp reason, reason will teach. Where force has made people conform outwardly to ideas, there has not been a solid idea to uphold the institution based on those ideas. For instance, the cry of liberty, equality and fraternity was not really learned by anyone in the French revolution, and so it was not preserved or defended, it decayed. So education is the only way, the only chance we have.
How to get people to want to teach two people. Teach them the enormous real benefits to them, namely non-extinction, and 100-fold safety peace and happiness. The extreme pay injustice. The connection between injustice and problems, especially violence. That injury ricochets as untiringly as atoms. That pay injustice, theft of money is the joker injury because money is the joker good, good for virtually all goods. That overpay can give very little more happiness, because of the decreasing marginal utility of money when almost all desires have been satisfied, which they are by fairpay of US$275,000 a year per average family, and because overpay, however large, is finite, and the erosion of overpay by underpay and overpay is endless, endlessly costly in time, life, labour and fortune, and so must fail, as history shows it always has. That self-earned money [taking out of the pool of social wealth as much as you put in, nontheft] is perfectly good, but other-earned money [taking out more than you put in by your work, theft] is perfectly bad, because every theft comes with an angry person attached, because inequality always grows, making violence and weaponry ever-growing, making life ever-more unpleasant.
If it is really true that both overpay and underpay are bad, not good, and if people can be brought to realise this, then the will is made. When the universal will is made, there is no opposition, no social struggle, no likelihood of failure.
The arguments that overpay is bad, not good, as people think, are not hard to understand. And the examples of history unanimously support them, and demonstrate them, by the many examples of overpay always delivering misery, and the examples of pay justice always delivering happiness. Education is the only chance we have, but there are many ways people come to convictions besides rationality, and these are the difficulties. But conversation, dialogue, discussion, with closest friends have the best chance of overcoming these barriers to human survival and happiness.
So the plan is first digesting and incorporating the rational arguments by sincere testing of them in one's mind, and then from a position of seeing clearly the enormous benefits, teaching them to two friends with sufficient impression that they will teach two friends, and so on. Word of mouth stays under the radar of those who are still devoted to overpay as good, and who would oppose, by force, fear and false arguments, the spreading of the message in public media. Money is good, it buys most good things, including necessities, but human history is the result of concluding from this truth the falsehood that more money is always better, forgetting the diminution of marginal desires and the limitation of self-earned money.
Details have to be gone into to convince. Many points have to be covered, many species of false ideas have to be exposed. But if, as it seems to me, overpay is bad for the overpaid, it follows that any reduction of overpay and underpay is good for all. So the plan is the learning and teaching of clear ideas, the unlearning of false ideas, generating a practically universal human will. No one can condemn this plan as impractical without seeing if, and how quickly, they themselves are convinced by the arguments, if they submit to sounding the ideas sincerely. As long as they do not inspect the arguments, they may prejudge the ideas to be impractical. It is only if they open themselves to experiencing their own barriers falling, that they can judge whether and how quickly others will learn.
The sometimes hard-to-believe conclusions here are based on easily believable premises. This plan hinges on changing people's ideas. And we can never assume to know that people will never change their ideas, or will take an impossibly long time to do so, or will take as long, or longer, than we do.
The rational arguments have never, to my knowledge, been stated before. The difficulty is getting people to take time to ponder them, chew them over, digest them, assimilate them.