Sure, but invert that point, and it's more effective. Many young people these days don't understand enough about history to get the 'communism is poverty' angle.
Instead, ask them what their desired end state is by spreading the wealth. Is it so that poor people have a better life? Bigger houses? Nicer cars? Better medicine?
If that's what they want, then shake their hand and welcome them to the capitalist fold. It's where lots of very rich people with competing good products seek to make their customers happy by tending to their physical needs.
When they look puzzled, ask, or did you want everything to be fair instead? What if we spread around all the money from the people who were making products, hiring workers and inventing things, and spread to people who don't make products, hire workers, or invent things? What are those people going to do with money when there's nothing to buy? Sit around with the formerly rich, and burn it for warmth?
When societal wealth is equal, it's because it flatlined.
Brilliant. I really am glad I asked for feedback. Sometimes you want to knock someone upside the head, but the best tactic is to make them consider what they are advocating. And if others happen to read then maybe they can see sense too.