The powerful in life almost always get more than the weak and that is just the way it is. And should be.
Your first statement is true, but you should've stopped there. Your second statement is normative and is subject to debate. It's up to us to decide how our polity ought to be organized. And we have a right to decide whether we want our laws to promote comity or disharmony.
In the first book of Plato's Republic, Thrasymachus tries to force Socrates and the other listeners to accept the proposition that justice is the advantage of the stronger. Socrates wasn't having any of that and ultimately reduced Thrasymachus to frustrated silence by force of argument. An interesting tableaux.
You can debate it all you want but you canot change it.
When the powerful have fewer assets than the non powerful, then the powerful are no longer the powerful, the non powerful now have the power.
The only time there will be equilibrium is when the roles of power are changing.
Therefore, since this is the way of nature, it is the way it is supposed to be.
Do you like apples?