Preemptive intervention has never been politically palatable in democracies. A concrete bad outcome is necessary to galvanize action.
Look how often even SNAP gets shade, and that's literally about feeding people.
But democracy worst form of government, except for all the other ones, etc. etc.
Many paths more commonly taken by the less fortunate are themselves net negative to society as a whole. Like crime or drug addiction/disease that socialized programs end up paying for.
So if we could be effective in redirecting people from those paths to healthily contributing ones instead, we could get to positive-sum. I'm already paying a lot of money for "today's result" things like property insurance, incarceration, and first responders for people, in the long run is taking action to fight the root problem more expensive?
(One of today's problem is that we mostly try to intervene at adolescence or later, at which point a ton of damage has already been done.