Potentially, yes, I think people have an equal potential to effect the world via different means. Idealistically, people's lives can be viewed as an equal essence( that is, not the individual themselves, but rather what makes them human-->basic human functions), in that sense, we are all equal.
If you view this in a literal sense: Economically, genetically, and fiscally.
People are not equal. Just look at human history: it's insistence on using titles and statuses, class warfare, and employment, or the most basic of human groupings, a tribe.
I think there is a general standard that would lead to one person being viewed as more valuable than the other, mainly by the skill-set or their 'offerings' that might be beneficial to the tribe or a potential mate.
If you think of it as a job type scenario, an employer is more likely to find worth in a employee that has the specified degree, is well tempered, healthy, etc, than an individual who lacks all of these things but offers different qualities that would be categorized as useless, and possibly "harmful".
Genetically speaking, naturally, we're still constantly striving to improve as specimens. This means that we are working towards looking for a mate that will give us the best chance to procreate with the best genetic outcome for basic survival.
The possibility of selection leads to subjective views of what is important to the viewer. The viewer can be a large group of people, or one individual.
If it comes to a survival scenario, the tribe would pick who they think will help them survive in the long run, and leave who will slow them down behind.
Where there is selection, there is inequality.
Edit: To an extent, worth could be measurable if there is a specific standard that everyone is being measured too.