No, that is not my argument and you don't understand the relationship dynamic. Group 1 would be justifiably upset because they aren't treated as equals to grou

No, that is not my argument and you don't understand the relationship dynamic. Group 1 would be justifiably upset because they aren't treated as equals to group 2. You are completely free to provide benefits for the poorest as well. If you see yourself in group 1, you are very free to take a step back. We both know you don't, you expect that from others. Neither "balance" nor "long term goals" are in any way defined, you just use random discrimination, which is of course negative between a bunch of negative ideas. You also draw lines between these group 1 + 2.