> No matter how you slice it, that would be a redistribution of wealth from the uneducated to the educated.

That's simply not true, at least not in any meaningful sense.

It would be perfectly straightforward to fund that entirely by raising income taxes on the highest earners.

I'm sure some of them count as "uneducated", in the technical "did not go to (or dropped out of) college" sense, but once you're selecting specifically for the highest earners, that ceases to actually matter.