Ice it seems you are seeing the problem through a very narrow lens here -- that of discrimination. In reality, the discrimination is often a consequence of resource scarcity. The resource scarcity comes first.
If you want to get rid of discrimination, you need to get rid of resource scarcity first. You cannot do it the other way round. To do so would contravene the principles of supply and demand, which have been, pretty much, fundamental social behaviours since time began, because discrimination is embedded in those principles.
Lets look at this from a different perspective. I have two bananas. There are ten people that want one of my bananas. How do I choose which people to give a banana? I can do it in a number of ways: by how much they are willing to pay, by whether I know them, by whether they seem more in need of a banana than the others ... but what ever I choose, I am discriminating against the others on grounds of price, tribalism, or perceived need. No matter what I do, I am discriminating in some way.
The only way for me to not discriminate is to have ten bananas. The problem is that, in the real world, we never have ten bananas. Or we do, but they are in the wrong place. Or we have them at the wrong time.
The further problem then comes when those ten people that want bananas suddenly become twenty, thirty, forty, fifty people wanting bananas.
Now take this concept through into healthcare. The NHS is finite. It is two bananas. It has to discriminate. And it did this from the beginning. It discriminates at the first point of call on the basis of "tribalism" and "price" -- i.e for the British residents, paid for through the British tax system. Then, once in the system, it discriminates on the basis of need, so the woman with a high risk pregnancy gets more ultrasound scans than a woman with a low risk pregnancy and so on.
What you appear to be asking for is for the NHS, say, to discriminate entirely on need, disregarding tribalism or price. There's an immediate problem here. You no longer just have ten people that want bananas; you have hundreds of millions. How will you then discriminate? Because you will have to. You can't say "on need" because there will be more people with "severe needs" than the NHS can cope with.
The second immediate problem is that you've already got a system that discriminates on price and tribalism. People have already paid for the service through the tax system by virtue of being from the same tribe (British residents paying tax). This is akin to taking a banana from someone that has already bought one and giving it to someone else because you think they deserve it more. There is a word for this: theft. 
The issue is that, for many British public services, the person that you think deserves the banana more than the person that paid for it will inevitably be of another "tribe", by default of the fact that the service is set up to discriminate on price and "home tribe". So when these banana-removed people complain, you are seeing it as "racism", when, in reality, it is about access to scarce resources that have already discriminated on price by virtue of tribe.
So then you are saying that, well ... these people aren't actually getting their bananas stolen or, if they are, the rich are stealing them.
I would say, in return, that we have an NHS funding crisis, we have a housing crisis, we have a schools crisis, we have an infrastructure crisis (sewage in London, spare electrical capacity is at warning levels, water reserves are very problematic) ... these are shrinking bananas. They are not "stolen", but they are definitely getting a lot smaller than they used to be.
As for the rich stealing the bananas? Well, yes. Imv, a lot of the global super rich are stealing bananas left, right and centre, but when it comes to British key public services, such as the NHS, the budgets have increased YOY. Then problem here is that the increase in the supply of bananas still does not match the increases in numbers of people wanting bananas.
And we can't cover the sahara in something reflective. It's someone's else sovereign territory, ice. It would be like covering one of your neighbour's roof in tin foil without their permission. And good luck trying to get permission from Libya at the moment.