Look this is the point. Lots of people are very successful and lots of people aren’t. A lot of circumstances beyond the control or outside the control of both of those groups contributed to success and failure. The successful have no better basis for claiming superiority than they have for assigning inferiority to the unsuccessful. The successful have gotten help (although many refuse to acknowledge it) in numerous and manifold ways from others and the government (at all levels).
So do we tell the unsuccessful to just suck it up?

There are systemic problems which can only be addressed systemically. Sometimes only a government can organize and harness the resources necessary to deal with a systemic problem. One question is whether you define things like poverty, malnourishment, poor education, ill-health, poorly distributed health care, poor air quality, poor water quality, environmental degradation generally, and all of their attendant ills and results as problems and as problems that are systemic. Another question is whether you think there is a benefit to gained from mitigating the effects of poverty, from equalizing, broadening and strengthening educational opportunity, from clean air and water and livable environments, and from distributing decent affordable healthcare to as many people as possible.
If you think they are systemic problems and you think there is a benefit for the nation as a whole to do something about them, then you are probably a Democrat.
If you think otherwise then you aren’t.

Two of the most common logical mistakes people make when analyzing situations is, on the one hand, to assume that everyone else is like them, and on the other, to assume that no one else is.

Me, I earned my right to vote. I have spent my career defending people’s rights.