Purge this film of history

Rating: Null/10 (8 April 2020)

1. If they are killing the poor, how does this benefit those in high places? No poor, no exploitation and with that no wealth accumulation. Killing poor people is the worst idea for a thriving economy.
2. What kind of moral compass does Charlie have that risking 4 people is worth saving 1? Because, we know, if this wasn't a film, everyone in that house would have died.
3. Zoey's boyfriend tried to kill her dad, there is a stranger at their home and a group of "cleansers" are outside threatening the lives of everyone, but when James decides to give the homeless man so he can save his family, the whole family start guilt tripping him?
4. When the "cleansers" get in and James is fighting them off, he makes sure to shoot again those that he didn't shoot before, so they are really dead. Why didn't the main "antagonist" do the same? And when he dies it is the (poor) redemption arc of Zoey, where she apologises to her father for doing the same thing he was trying to do, their family (James and Zoey) ended up killing at least 5 other people, or are their deaths acceptable because they were "antagonists"?
5. Finally the film ends with the jealous neighbours trying to cleanse their anger towards that family by killing them, only to be interrupted by the homeless man, which grabs one of them and, for some reason, they are not so angry anymore. There were 3 armed people - which killed at least 4 invaders - against 1 with a hostage and they feel like the safety of said hostage is more important than "The Purge", they are held up and spent the rest of the night, in an unprotected house waiting the Sun to come up and the hostilities to be ceased.
The story is a mess, the acting is a mess, the direction is also a mess, nothing can be salvaged from this.