You are starting from an assumption that it seems a lot of people are ready to make, but is fundamentally wrong. You assume others place a value on life similar to your own - they do not. You assume that rich = bored evil-doer and I'm not even going to commment on that.
On the first assumption, it is important to understand that folks like Saddam Hussein and just about every other person in power in the Middle East has a slightly different take on things that you do. There are the "faithful" and there are infidels. Infidels are not "people", they are obstructions to a goal. "Using up" the faithful in pursuit of a holy goal is acceptable - that is what Jihad is, after all. These folks do not have the same goals that Western civilization does. You can argue that Western goals are "wrong" and that we should adopt their goals instead, but that is a different subject entirely.
Western civilization cannot "make peace" with these folks because they aren't interested in the same things. We want to contain or eliminate a threat and go back to shopping and watching TV. They want something different, and shopping isn't part of it at all. Frankly, we don't understand completely what they do want - it is outside of our understanding for the most part. So, assuming your average Iraqi, Palestinian or Iranian wants to live like your average American or someone in France is wrong. It is factually wrong - they don't - but even more so it is culturally wrong. It is typically Western to assume that because we want things that others do as well, and that they place a similar value on them. This is assuming "facts not in evidence" and building up from there.
There is plenty of evidence to indicate they view killing infidel humans like we view killing rats. You put the traps out and empty them when they are full. You don't hold ceremonies for the dead rats. Unless they can somehow get around the idea that we're people too - just like them - the idea of a peaceful co-existance is as foreign to them as it would be for us to negotiate with rats.
Now you may not like the realization that one day it is likely to come down to us vs. them - and only one will walk away, but that is the point of Jihad. Does this mean that every Muslim is our enemy who must be destroyed? No. It does mean there are people that have no intention of negotiating with us on reasonable terms and against these people we must win. At the same time, we must never lose sight that no matter how much they treat us like vermin to be exterminated, we must treat them like people. Does that mean we can't kill them? No, people get killed all the time. It does mean that we have to kill them as an enemy and not as we would exterminate vermin.
Open Class Warfare
As to the idea that somehow the rich should compensate the poor for bearing all the burdens in the world, well, that's silly. All a proposal like this would result in is a vast, uncontrollable riot. Don't you remember the 1960's? I guess not - you probably wern't born yet. If the "poor" have nothing to lose, they will destroy their infrastructure and everyone else's along with it. All this proposal does is show (with plenty of supporting evidence) that the "poor" are worth nothing as humans and only the "rich" count. Assigning a monetary value to human life is pretty low, even for crass Westerners. It would make us little better than the folks that want to destroy us.
Considering the proposal more seriously, what you are asking is pretty much to tax the rich out of existance - or at least the "semi-rich" and force them to be "average". While that might seem to have a funny kind of justice to some folks, it isn't going to work. Rich people got that way in one of a few relatively simple ways - they fell into it, or they fought for it.
If they fell into it, then maybe you might take it away without much of a fight. If they fought for it, they are likely to start over again and just become rich again. Wouldn't that really wreck things? If you change the rules so they can't win here, they will pick up and go somewhere else where they can win - and that society will receive the benefit of their efforts.
We have seen this happen over and over again in the last 500 years or so - people with motivation and aptitude get pushed out of one society and end up somewhere else - where they succeed.
The question you might like to ask instead is why everyone can't succeed. Don't tell me it is capitalism, because the same patterns have existed for thousands of years, regardless of the underlying economic system. Don't tell me it is because they are a minority and therefore somehow disadvantaged, because even in the US "White" does not equal "Rich", nor does "Black" equal "Poor". So what is it? Figure that out and maybe you have something worth talking about.