Education is often a financial inheritance in disguise. If dad pays for your K-12 private schooling and entire Harvard education, how is that practically different than a direct cash transfer?

Would you want to live in a society where a parent would definitely not pay for better education? What kind of people would those be!?

I'd prefer a situation where everyone automatically paid for university fees via a graduate tax and no one has the option to pay outright.

This just moves the goalpost. Parents will pay for something that improves the odds of their children. Should a society where that just does not exist or is allowed be preferable? I think nobody wants that.

Perfectly equality isn't possible but we should make it so any child can reach the height of socio-economic success. To do that we occasionally need to tear down the advantages others have such as in this case.

What does the height of socio-economic success bring you if you can't even help in any way your immediate family?

If success means just the ability to buy stuff, the richest person gets the same iPhone, so why bother striving for more?

Perfect equality means total inhumanity and the destruction of family.

Yet if everyone made supporting their family through the generations their primary goal it would lead to incredible inequality as the advantages of those born to well off family allowed them to make their kids even better off and so on, while the less well off could never catch up. We know from experience that excessive levels of inequality leads to destruction of society.

The cluelessness is just baffling. I wrote a much longer reply but there's no point in pursuing this further...

Please do reply, I'm genuinely interested.