i agree that there's a growing set of people...tough to label in any particular demographic...that either feel, or really are, disenfranchised from economic betterment. You touched on two big issues that would likely help alleviate some financial burden and expand opportunities, everything else equal. Health crises without insurance can destroy a family's finances, and education does boost earning potential...again, everything else equal.

However, not everything else is equal and even these seemingly glaring examples can be overdone with policy support. Federal and state governments have been giving away health and education subsidies for decades...problems are not solved and so many still remain pessimistic; and they've distorted both markets horribly in the process, so we don't know what negative outcomes today are due to that distortion versus what would exist without involvement. Everything's a trade off and i have to say that i don't like the outcomes of government monopolizing health care or subsidizing education to the extent they do. There are costs and there are definitely benefits...you're right in that these discussions so often break down in partisan bickering where each side latches onto whatever confirms their own biases; if you want "free" anything you tout the benefits and ignore the costs, if you're against it, you just focus on the costs and ignore the benefits.

I don't support either of these approaches bc i believe advocates ignore the long run and especially hidden costs. Government monopolies suck and always badly manage resources and stifle innovation. Trillions of federal dollars to fund college education has jacked up tuition and created a new debtor class of people who probably should have learned productive trades instead of inefficiently invested in negative yielding degrees.

That said, there are both simpler and deeper ways to make life better for people who feel disenfranchised. Some simple ideas are catastrophic event health insurance subsidies (not the beast we call health insurance today, which is really a terrible pre-paid bundle of hundreds of services you'll never use), or a universal basic income; the deeper fixes address things that cause slower growth that reduces real employment and hence real wage growth, like dumb or inefficient regulations, licensure barriers, taxation, etc. Of these two solution paths i prefer the latter, but wouldn't complain too deeply about the former if given proper concessions with a mixed bag.

Ultimately, however, i believe that human beings retain the right to their own lives and no matter what my opinions happen to be, none of us have claim to any portion of others' lives against their wills. Taxation to pursue these types of social agendas is partial slavery for those compelled to contribute against their will. Unacceptable from a moral perspective.