That's too narrow a view of evolution. A better way to frame it is: which group is more likely to propagate their genes and have more ancestors 100/1,000/10,00

That's too narrow a view of evolution. A better way to frame it is: which group is more likely to propagate their genes and have more ancestors 100/1,000/10,000 years in the future? Is it the group that can afford to have more children and successfully raise them, or the group that can't afford large families? It doesn't matter if the cause is biological or socioeconomic. Just because humans have science, medicine, economics, etc. doesn't mean evolution has "stopped".