What you're describing simply isn't how common law fraud works in a civil setting. To sue someone for civil fraud, you need to be able to show that (among other things) you relied on their fraudulent misrepresentations and that said reliance was the
proximate cause of damages you incurred. Whatever damages were incurred by the "people of New York" because they didn't get the breaks/opportunities/wealth/etc. that Trump got through fraud (still not even sure what you mean by that), their damages weren't PROXIMATELY caused by Trump's fraud.
But by all means, show me the legal precedent where Party A has standing to sue Party B for fraudulently obtaining a bank loan (that was paid on time and in full) from a bank that had no affiliation with Party A purely because Party A "did NOT get the same deals, the same tax breaks, the same tax pardons, the same valuations, the same loan deal rates" that Party B got through the bank fraud it perpetrated.
You're basically saying that I have standing to sue literally anyone who's ever committed bank fraud because I didn't get whatever benefits they got from the fraud they committed