One of the many disreputable tactics used by the advocates of SCHIP expansion has been to accuse their opponents of waging “a war on children.” But Mark Steyn points out that genuine concern for ”the children” would manifest itself as follows:
Try not to make the same mistake as most of the rest of the Western world and avoid bequeathing the next generation a system of unsustainable entitlements that turns the entire nation into a giant Ponzi scheme.
Europe is, of course, much farther down this road than we are. Most EU member countries are already straining under the weight of social welfare commitments, including socialized medicine, that they cannot possibly meet for more than a decade or two into the future. But the populace is hooked:
Once a fellow’s enjoying the fruits of Euro-style entitlements, he couldn’t give a hoot about the general societal interest; he’s got his, and who cares if it’s going to bankrupt the state a generation hence?
And every time a government tries to impose some fiscal sanity to the system, the entitlement junkies scream “bloody murder”:
In France, President Sarkozy is proposing a very modest step – that those who retire before the age of 65 should not receive free health care – and the French are up in arms about it.
This is what we’re headed for if Pelosi, Reid, Clinton and their various accomplices succeed in using programs like SCHIP to incrementally transform the U.S. into a European-style social welfare state.
The people waging the real “war on children” are those who want to stick the next generation with the bill for this folly.
Comments 7
Right, but the fact that we spend more on 9 months in Iraq than we do on the 5-year CHIP expansion doesn’t register on Steyn’s radar. For a pro-Iraq pundit like Steyn to make this argument about CHIPs is laughable and pathetic.
Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 10:03 pm ¶‘Once a fellow’s enjoying the fruits of Euro-style entitlements, he couldn’t give a hoot about the general societal interest’
This is extraordinary nonsense even by Steyn’s low standards. What’s he saying is that you can support and vote for things like the UK’s NHS and pay higher tax and therefore have societal interest in mind and then if you dare to use the service you are suddenly selfish. And anyone who thinks that living on welfare is an easy ride needs to visit a doctor.
Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 8:47 am ¶The fact that we spend more on 9 months in Iraq than we do on the 5-year CHIP expansion doesn’t register on Steyn’s radar.
Spike, is there any brainless Lefty talking point that you won’t repeat like a trained parrot?
Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 9:30 am ¶All I’m saying is that this argument might have weight if it weren’t pro-tax cut, pro-deficit, pro-Iraq War pundits making it. Calling something a “talking point” doesn’t make it wrong. Do you care to actually respond to my comment?
Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 1:49 pm ¶In order to render your comment response-worthy, you’ll have to explain why you think being “pro-tax cut, pro-deficit, pro-Iraq War” disqualifies Steyn from taking a position on this issue.
Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 2:18 pm ¶Because you can’t claim fiscal responsibility now that you’ve blown the budget deficit on things that are far less worthy than S-CHIP.
Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 4:38 pm ¶Spike, your use of the word “worthy” outs you as an ideologue with no real interest in “fiscal responsibility.”
Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 6:15 pm ¶Post a Comment