Well nobody has ever succeeded in doing a lot of things that haven't been done yet. But more to the point, we have to define a rich economy, and inequality.

Is a rich economy just a bigger economy than most? Or an economy with surplus? Or an economy with lots of value (and then we define value)?

Is inequality some people having less money than others? Or not having as much stuff? Or privileges? Or not being able to self-sustain? Or unequal social treatment?

I think the more important questions come from fully understanding what we want and how we're trying to get it. If all we care about is that some people have more than others, we will literally be fucked for eternity. But if instead what we care about is that everyone can eat food and live somewhere without struggling to do it, we can achieve that in probably many kinds of economies, but the economy obviously has to be set up to be sustainable in the face of that requirement.

A lot of economies are just shitty regardless of how they're set up, for the same reason that a lot of humans don't have the same privileges, even though they're made of the same meat.