If I put out a sign that says "free chocolate", it would be silly to respond by saying that somebody must have paid in time and/or money to produce the chocolate. Because that's entirely obvious, and not the point. When somebody points out that "free tuition" or "free healthcare" have monetary inputs, that's a pointless response to a strawman misinterpretation. Saying that we should have "free tuition" isn't at all a statement that education should somehow magically be done without any effort on the part of society. It's a statement that the costs of education shouldn't be shouldered by those receiving the education.
This is even referred to in loquation's post, by describing it as an ideological problem. I agree, and would pose the ideological question as follows: Should education be treated as an individual investment or a societal investment? If it is an individual investment, then it should be paid for by the student either up front or through debt, and that investment is recouped directly through higher income. If it is a societal investment, then it should be paid for by society as a whole (i.e. publicly funded through taxes), and that investment is recouped indirectly through opportunities that require a more educated society.
This is even referred to in loquation's post, by describing it as an ideological problem. I agree, and would pose the ideological question as follows: Should education be treated as an individual investment or a societal investment? If it is an individual investment, then it should be paid for by the student either up front or through debt, and that investment is recouped directly through higher income. If it is a societal investment, then it should be paid for by society as a whole (i.e. publicly funded through taxes), and that investment is recouped indirectly through opportunities that require a more educated society.