Sincerely curious if there are working historical analogues of these approaches.
You have to ask, if we have AGI that's smarter than humans helping us plan the economy, why do we need an upper class? Aren't they completely superfluous?
Historically the elites aren't just those who have lots of money or property. They're also those who get to decide and enforce the rules for society.
It's not necessary for everyone to be exactly equal, it is necessary for inequalities to be seen as legitimate (meaning the person getting more is performing what is obviously a service to society). Legislators should be limited to the average working man's wage. Democratic consultations should happen in workplaces, in schools, all the way up the chain not just in elections. We have the forms of this right now, but basically the people get ignored at each step because legislators serve the interests of the propertied.
We already have conscious feelings about these things, but it's virtually impossible to enforce it into the market at scale in a meaningful way.
We could take a broadly agreed on sentiment like "I really want the caregivers taking care of my grandparents in the rest home to be qualified and adequately paid so they'll do their best", and mysteriously the market will breed a solution that's "the agency is charging $50 per hour and delivering a $12 per hour warm body that will do the bare legal minimum to avoid neglect charges."
We try regulation, but again, the market evolves the countermeasures of least-cost checkbox compliance. All because we aren't willing to take direct command over economic actors.