In a sentence, is “who are” necessary, or does it just add to wordiness?

In a sentence, is “who are” necessary, or does it just add to wordiness?
I am writing an essay.

Which is better: “People who are experiencing struggle…”, or “People experiencing struggle”?

To answer this question, I have to elaborate on the use of “who.” Take note that this demonstrative pronoun is used to indicate a subordinate clause, that is in the sentence “He who is without sin cast the first stone,” “…who is without sin…” is a modifier to the subject “He.” Therefore, the word “who” acts as bridge for the modifier “…without sin…” to clearly define “He.” “Who” can also be replaced with a comma, to signify this time, no longer a subordinate clause but an appositive. For example, you can change the sentence above from its original to “He, those without sin, cast the first stone” or “Ed, the family’s driver…” But without the “who,” then the following words would merely be noun adjectives in an inverted form. Example: “A Man without sin (inverted of ‘a sinless man’) should cast the first stone.”

In conclusion, I answer that the “who are” is necessary in your sentence. See for yourself, “People who are experiencing struggle…” if you will follow this statement with an active verb, as example: “People who are experiencing struggle LOOK PITIFUL…” but if you are to use the second format, then the statement should be followed by a linking verb, as example: “People experiencing struggle ARE PITIFUL…” Notice the difference?

I hope this answers your question. : )
Sorry if I did a long answer…