How do you account for philanthropy and charitable donations and private groups who administer programs in their particular interest? People economically vote (for lack of a better way of putting it) in this way, too, by spending extra income and time toward these endeavors. They choose what interests them.
Higher taxes and governmental control over these matters is less efficient and would stifle this large segment of the economy, no? I'm of the opinion that individuals want to say where their resources go and not have a governmental agency take that choice away. I don't believe that socialism is inevitable because there are other proven ways of administering social programs.
I think you're right in observing that this is the direction our federal government is heading, and has been for 200 years. In 1800 there were 4 cabinet positions. In 1900 there were 8, and today I think the number is 24. Not the way I prefer it to be, but obviously the trend it to identify a social issue and then create a whole Administrative arm of government to eff it up.