Social Insecurity

Tim Walz's story about his Mom may have revealed more about the liberal mindset than he intended:

If we were to believe Tim, his mother would starve without her Social Security check arriving on time. That says more about Tim than about Social Security, the government, Donald Trump, Republicans, or whoever he is trying to make a point about. If this were literally true, Tim Walz is a monster. Of course, it is not LITERALLY true. First of all, you have to work hard to be food insecure in the United States. The only reason somebody becomes food insecure is that there is some fundamental dysfunction in the person or their caretaker. A child may have a drug-abusing parent, for instance, which is a tragedy, of course, but not a failure of society. We live in a country where, when people are in need, strangers will fly in helicopters and drop off food and supplies at the drop of a hat. So what Tim is really saying is something different: the government ought to be the primary caretaker for everybody, including his mother. He shouldn't have to care for her; caring is a job to be outsourced. That has been the ideological foundation of the welfare statists for over a century. It is a foundational principle of Marxism, which aims to substitute the state for the family. "It takes a village," as it were, because it shouldn't be the parents themselves who raise children or children who take care of their parents as they age.

The government isn't the village...