Distribution of Wealth Vs Redistribution

I've been exploring the philosophy behind the redistribution of wealth lately. It's a really dumb idea honestly, but I think there is a core principle behind it worth looking at:
The core principle is that there is a problem in our society with how wealth is disproportionately found among an elite group of people. The problem is manifest in inequality relationships in class, race, education, religion, and most other strata of society. --Simply put, being born in a privileged group that has access to wealth and resources, grants you a circular effect of greater education, opportunities, power positions, etc. It allows for the domination of minority groups such as racial or ethnic groups, and it has the great potential of securing bad actors in the position of power.

But, redistributing wealth is a bad idea because wealth is only one factor in the equation. People who are born wealthy have more resources than just financial resources at their disposal. With wealth comes connections or social capital. With wealth comes positions of power. With wealth comes greater education (as much as I hate to admit it). --Not to say that someone who is poor can't become as educated or intelligent or even surpass that of a wealthy person, but the journey is harder and the statistics of intelligent wealthy people outnumber unwealthy intelligent people.
Redistributing the wealth of people who have already amassed wealth and power is a bad idea if done on a strictly wealth basis--I have to make that claim because there may in the future come philosophies where many factors (intelligence, means, wealth, resources, knowledge, etc) are taken into account and actually balance the concept of redistribution, but it doesn't seem as feasible in my perspective of today.

A better idea (though probably facing the same level of pushback as redistribution) would be redefinition of distribution. Meaning, changing the way in which wealthy people can make money and collect resources and political power away from the way it is presently done today. --We know of the inherit flaws in our systems, and it isnt' to say that our political or social institutions benefit wealthy people, but rather wealthy people are aware of how to game the system and are better positioned to do so to strategically place themselves in such a way as to secure their current gains and accumulated wealth and also future gains.
What I am suggesting is that we redefine what is acceptable and what is not acceptable (i.e. ethical and protectable by social/legal laws).

I will present my ideas on a few topics which I see as possible for the distribution of wealth (NOT the redistribution). --I still believe that the wealthy--initially-- will have an advantage and may thwart the attempts, but if bright philosophical minds can combat such thwarts, perhaps we can make a social course adjustment to a more ethical, more equitable society which we all dream about.