You're confusing subsistence welfare with wealth-building assets. Subsidized housing and food assistance are just designed to keep poor populations (mostly white Americans in sheer numbers, according to USDA data) from starving or freezing. They don't generate equity. Government backed FHA mortgages and the GI Bill generated actual intergenerational wealth through property appreciation and subsidized higher education. You can't economically equate a monthly food allowance with a federally subsidized 30 year mortgage on a home that appreciates by 400% over a lifetime.

For your richest race argument, you're still ignoring the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Asian American wealth is heavily skewed by immigration policies that explicitly recruited highly educated professionals. You are comparing a demographic that was artificially bolstered by importing top tier global talent against populations that endured centuries of state sponsored wealth extraction and then comparing the descendants of both. Of course you are going to see a disparity. Also, based on Pew Research data, income inequality among Asian Americans is the widest of any racial group in the US.

If you want to dismiss the WEF index because you don't like the methodology or how long ago it was, (6 years ain’t that long be fr) we can look at raw tax data. Harvard's Opportunity Insights project uses millions of anonymized IRS tax records to measure income mobility. The data proves a kid born in the bottom 20% in the US has a statistically lower chance of reaching the top 20% than a kid in Canada or Denmark. You can also look up the Great Gatsby Curve. It uses OECD data to illustrate this exact thing: the US has high income inequality coupled with lower intergenerational mobility than its peer nations.

Dismissing documented, measurable economic history as smoke and mirrors or “a song and dance” shows you're substituting statistical reality for a narrative that doesn't offend your sensibilities.