I'll tell you what. I agree: the lives of the working class has indeed improved. The majority of the population in the West no longer lives in abject poverty. 

So what? What's the next logical question? 

The myth's been broken. Ask the question. 

Your entire post in shockingly inaccurate and objectively wrong on all accounts.  Never thought it was possible to have so many errors in a single post.

In terms of if health is a protected right, something to consider:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Welfare definition: the health, happiness, and fortunes of a person or group.

Except the video literally doesn't demonstrate nor validate anything related to economics systems, good or bad.  The video literally only shows technology moving forward over years, and concludes people have it better because capitalism.  Two issues:  

1) Technology moves forwards for all countries.  Even third world countries have more technology today than 100 years ago.  So technology singularly isn't a capitalist metric.  It is a metric that has always evolved, heck technology moved forward before this country was even founded via the wheel, bridges, boats, aqueducts, etc.  Technology is absolutely not a metric of how well our system is working for the masses.      

2) Technology is a singular metric, not a comprehensive metric.  It doesn't speak to a wide variety of other metrics that would comprehensively determine how well an economic system is.  Glaringly omitted is social class mobility between generations, which is a far better metric than if phone technology has improved since 1906.     

Which is why the video is literally for morons who can't think for themselves and only want to have their bias confirmed.  

Edit

In case you actually want to read and educate yourself on a exceptionally complex topic, as opposed to believing a 2 minute video explains economic complexity in meaningful detail.  

http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/

It isn't possible to point anything out to those who are not interested in learning.

Unwilling to learn is the opposite of convenient. Which is why we are on page 8 and you are parroting the same nonsense as page 1. Have fun with that, I'm off to play DQ Builders 2 and some MHW.

You completely miss the point again and again. The video shows incremental improvement to the lives of people and that is true. It then connects it to an ideological discussion, which is the faulty point. See, in east germany things were better in the 80s than they were in the 50s. In the Soviet Union things were better shortly before it dissolved than they were 50 years prior. Actually, things got worse at first after the soviet union dissolved and Russia turned to capitalism. Same in China, Vietnam, Cuba. It is not capitalism, socialism or whateverism that caused this improvement in live, it is technological progress, which is completely independent of ideology.

The fallacy here is, that complaints about things that could be better (which are justified) are caricated in this video as complaints about things stay the same. But that wasn't actually said by progressives. See, I am a technician. In the technical world constructive criticism is something good, as this means we have an idea what can be improved. That is why technicians tend to welcome constructive criticism. This is the worldview that resulted in exactly the technological progress the video depicted. Now constructive criticism at society, economy and government are met often by conservatives and right-wingers with resistance. This is what holds us back. Not every concept that is proposed has to be implemented as proposed. But if we want progress, we have to listen to the problems people have.

So the funny thing about the video is, that it criticizes progressives by presenting progress in a way that insinuates that progress came from the conservative 'do not change anything'-mentality.

I'm not gonna lie. I did not have much expectations but you still managed to disappoint me. Dude. You went back to square one all by yourself. 

Your response is going to be "convenient," and believe me, I did have a response. But I'm done haha 

Hint: Acceptable (scientific/social scientific/philosophical/logical questions) include words such as why, how, or what. For instance, why did the well-being of people improve? Could it be that capitalism - or could it be state intervention? Starting from there, we could have had an interesting discussion. Another question would be, how do we continue improving? There could have been stuff there to discuss. Maybe you had interesting thought. 

Double hint: Saying that one, small argument that hardly anyone makes is no longer an argument, is not an argument in itself. 

Is it though?

This is the Gini Index, a measure for inequality. That it is going up means the differences between rich and poor are becoming bigger. This means in the 60s and 70s the economic results were had also more impact among the poorer class, the workers for instance. Nowadays the inequality is on the rise, which means the upper class see benefits from economic growth, but not the lower class and the poor.

Here you see the results of the failing health care system of the US. While life expectancy has risen with the technological progress, the US can't access the full potential seen in other developed countries as the US health care system is broken. You see 20 years ago the US was among other developed countries, but since then life expectancy fell back. So people in the US die earlier just because of the failings of the health care system.

This  graph shows how broken the US health care system is from another angle: the costs exploded. And as you could see the US doesn't even provide health care on a level which is matching other developed countries.

Another pretty real problem: personal debts. As you can see until the 80s the households were able to save more and more. Debts had swings, probably depending on economic situation. But since the 90s debts exploded while savings are now lower than they were just after WWII. This is a real existential crisis for a lot of people.

And why do people think they are left behind? Because they are.