People do not flee from "free" things they move towards them and only later suffer the consequences.

And if the negative consequences do not materialize, it's because it didn't last long enough because it was too expensive because too many people wanted in. I do understand your argument.

The simple assumption is that the intention all along was to fully socialize childrens' care. Yet, reality, in the form of a recession, hit them too fast and they were forced to cut their losses before the program began to seriously cripple the State's treasury.

I understand why you want to say that, but where is your evidence? This is supposed to be an example not a coat-hook on which prejudices can be hung.