Free School Lunches

[thegeneral 3,116]

Is everyone for this? Massachusetts  is the 8th state to make this happen.

Link

[IGotWorms 4,057]

Yeah I’m for it. Good way to ensure kids are getting at least one nutritious meal per day. Making it universal removes the stigma for poor kids and makes it more palatable for middle class folk who aren’t just paying for other peoples’ benefit

[Strike 5,410]

Generally I'm not for more spending but I'm ok with this one for the reasons Worms mentioned. 

[Ultra Max Power 214]

As long as the schools are doing the lunches right I'm all for it.  I'm skeptical in some districts ability to run a kitchen and have a decent menu.

Last school year my daughter's school had a veterans day lunch where parents who had served could eat with their child and get a free school lunch.  I had the option of a grilled cheese or a corndog and was given a fruit cup, a bag of chips and one of those little hug drinks.  Thats not a lunch I want my kid eating 5 days a week.  

 

[thegeneral 3,116]

This should be in all 50 states. Even make the food healthy next. 

 

[thegeneral 3,116]

3 minutes ago, Ultra Max Power said:

As long as the schools are doing the lunches right I'm all for it.  I'm skeptical in some districts ability to run a kitchen and have a decent menu.

Last school year my daughter's school had a veterans day lunch where parents who had served could eat with their child and get a free school lunch.  I had the option of a grilled cheese or a corndog and was given a fruit cup, a bag of chips and one of those little hug drinks.  Thats not a lunch I want my kid eating 5 days a week.  

 

Yep. That should be phase two of the plan to make sure all kids in the US are able to eat lunch. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,251]

If you can’t feed your children you shouldn’t have any. 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,314]

im for it, id rather our taxes goto that than gender studies garbage

 

[weepaws 3,167]

Tax free food for children, shouldn’t  even be an issue, all states should be doing it.   

[bostonlager 2,664]

Lunches paid for by others would be a more accurate thread title. 

[seafoam1 2,917]

4 hours ago, thegeneral said:

This should be in all 50 states. Even make the food healthy next. 

 

[seafoam1 2,917]

1 hour ago, weepaws said:

Tax free food for children, shouldn’t  even be an issue, all states should be doing it.   

Why. You don't think parents should pay for the food for their kids?

Of course, they will pay through tuition. 

[seafoam1 2,917]

Dang you liberals are stupid.

[League Champion 1,909]

7 hours ago, thegeneral said:

This should be in all 50 states. Even make the food healthy next. 

 

Agree, no kid should go hungry 

[League Champion 1,909]

Just a sliver of the money we're wasting in Ukraine would easily accomplish this. 

[thegeneral 3,116]

8 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

If you can’t feed your children you shouldn’t have any. 

Eeessh

[thegeneral 3,116]

4 hours ago, bostonlager said:

Lunches paid for by others would be a more accurate thread title. 

That’s implied by the word “free”. Lunches should be paid for by society and should be included in the whole education process.

[MDC 7,284]

No way - bootstrap yourselves up hungry kids!  

[Hardcore troubadour 15,251]

7 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Eeessh

You disagree? 

[League Champion 1,909]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

You disagree? 

I do agree, but it's not the kids fault. They don't deserve to starve because they have useless parents. 

[thegeneral 3,116]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

You disagree? 

It’s beside the point. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,251]

2 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

It’s beside the point. 

 

4 minutes ago, League Champion said:

I do agree, but it's not the kids fault. They don't deserve to starve because they have useless parents. 

Who said that? And kids are starving in America ? Where? 

[TBayXXXVII 2,519]

I'm against it because it's the one thing that people using the school system have to pay for, because they're using it.  The people living in the district, without kids, are already paying for so much without using the school system, that to pay even more for other people's responsibility (feeding their own kids), is too much in my opinion.  Also, the whole stigma stuff about rich and poor kids is ridiculous in the sense that, free lunch for everyone is the only way to avoid the issue.  An easy solution is to this is to simply have parents supply an account for automatic withdrawal from their accounts to pay for lunch.  If there are people who are poor and can't afford it, then they can apply for exemption.  In the end, no one has to physically pay for their meal, but the kids who are there, and having their parents paying for it.

Back when I was in school, 30 years ago, we had 3 different levels of lunch, free, reduced, and full.  Kids who couldn't to pay for lunch, got a certain color ticket to hand over to not have to pay.  Kids who could afford some, gave a different color ticket and a little bit of cash.  Kids who could afford it, pay cash.  None of that process has to change, from a financial standpoint.  If the stigma bullcrap needs to be addressed, just do what I said, make the payment happen behind the scenes and the kids don't have to physically pay for anything, it happens in the office or even at the district office.  Not that hard.

I'm amazed at the virtue signaling from some of our posters.  Obviously not for the liberals, because they don't see nuance, they just pretend to because their masters tell them how to think, but as for the others, I'm a little surprised.  Let's be honest, the VAST MAJORITY of kids in school have parents who can afford to pay for their kids' lunches.  Why should people who can afford it, get a get out of jail free card?  If there are people who can't afford it, fine, file for an exemption or reduction on cost.  As a tax paying citizen, I don't feel the need to pay for 90% of the kids who's parents make what I make (or more), just because 10% can't.  I have no problem chipping in for the 10%, but the other 90% can take care of their own kids.

Free lunches for all is Pandering 101.

[GutterBoy 2,899]

6 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

 

Who said that? And kids are starving in America ? Where? 

1 in 8 kids in the United States are living with hunger. That's 9 million children.

https://www.nokidhungry.org/blog/how-many-kids-united-states-live-hunger

More than 34 million people, including 9 million children, in the United States are food insecure, according to the U. S. Department of Agriculture, meaning they lack consistent access to enough food for every person in their family to be healthy.

https://apnews.com/article/free-school-lunch-child-hunger-7d38b5a84e533129f507d76cc05c622f

[seafoam1 2,917]

1 minute ago, GutterBoy said:

1 in 8 kids in the United States are living with hunger. That's 9 million children.

https://www.nokidhungry.org/blog/how-many-kids-united-states-live-hunger

More than 34 million people, including 9 million children, in the United States are food insecure, according to the U. S. Department of Agriculture, meaning they lack consistent access to enough food for every person in their family to be healthy.

https://apnews.com/article/free-school-lunch-child-hunger-7d38b5a84e533129f507d76cc05c622f

Then kill the parents. You are a focking idiot. 

[thegeneral 3,116]

4 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Then kill the parents. You are a focking idiot. 

People saying no to this…Here’s the people on your side

Come on over to the right side of this. Yes it would be great if all parents were responsible, if there were no fockups. But there are, there will always be (including some people with bad luck or other circumstances).

Making sure a kid gets food is something that should be a given in the US.

[TBayXXXVII 2,519]

2 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

People saying no to this…Here’s the people on your side

Come on over to the right side of this. Yes it would be great if all parents were responsible, if there were no fockups. But there are, there will always be (including some people with bad luck or other circumstances).

Making sure a kid gets food is something that should be a given in the US.

I am on the right side, just because I have some people talking out of their azz are on it too, doesn't make my side wrong.

[thegeneral 3,116]

13 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I'm against it because it's the one thing that people using the school system have to pay for, because they're using it.  The people living in the district, without kids, are already paying for so much without using the school system, that to pay even more for other people's responsibility (feeding their own kids), is too much in my opinion.  Also, the whole stigma stuff about rich and poor kids is ridiculous in the sense that, free lunch for everyone is the only way to avoid the issue.  An easy solution is to this is to simply have parents supply an account for automatic withdrawal from their accounts to pay for lunch.  If there are people who are poor and can't afford it, then they can apply for exemption.  In the end, no one has to physically pay for their meal, but the kids who are there, and having their parents paying for it.

Back when I was in school, 30 years ago, we had 3 different levels of lunch, free, reduced, and full.  Kids who couldn't to pay for lunch, got a certain color ticket to hand over to not have to pay.  Kids who could afford some, gave a different color ticket and a little bit of cash.  Kids who could afford it, pay cash.  None of that process has to change, from a financial standpoint.  If the stigma bullcrap needs to be addressed, just do what I said, make the payment happen behind the scenes and the kids don't have to physically pay for anything, it happens in the office or even at the district office.  Not that hard.

This is what the Massachusites program highlighted In the article does.

[seafoam1 2,917]

8 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

People saying no to this…Here’s the people on your side

Come on over to the right side of this. Yes it would be great if all parents were responsible, if there were no fockups. But there are, there will always be (including some people with bad luck or other circumstances).

Making sure a kid gets food is something that should be a given in the US.

Hard times my ass. They shouldn't be having kids. And I choose not to support a bunch of idiots that have kids but can't raise them. The kids suffer? Lesson learned. Maybe they learn from it and grow. up to be responsible unlike their parents. Leave tax payer dollars out of it.

Don't include me in with the other idiots talking out of their asses.

[WatsonRules 46]

Out of all the things they take money from my paycheck to pay for, this would be something I would not find objectionable. 

[thegeneral 3,116]

2 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Hard times my ass. They shouldn't be having kids. And I choose not to support a bunch of idiots that have kids but can't raise them. The kids suffer? Lesson learned. Maybe they learn from it and grow. up to be responsible unlike their parents. Leave tax payer dollars out of it.

What a guy! Your opinion has been noted. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,519]

6 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

This is what the Massachusites program highlighted In the article does.

Then they're late.  NJ has done this for decades.  When you title the thread a "Free lunch", the assumption is that it's for everyone.  Plus, the headline of the article says "universal".  Also, I have a VERY hard time believing that $56B is the cost for lunches for kids who's parents can't afford to pay for lunch, in the state.

[seafoam1 2,917]

Just now, WatsonRules said:

Out of all the things they take money from my paycheck to pay for, this would be something I would not find objectionable. 

Of course the dumb ass liberal watsonpimpledoosh thinks this.

[seafoam1 2,917]

Just now, thegeneral said:

What a guy! Your opinion has been noted. 

generalwadewatsonpimpledoosh says something stupid yet again. 

[MDC 7,284]

18 minutes ago, seafoam1 said:

Hard times my ass. They shouldn't be having kids. And I choose not to support a bunch of idiots that have kids but can't raise them. The kids suffer? Lesson learned. Maybe they learn from it and grow. up to be responsible unlike their parents. Leave tax payer dollars out of it.

Don't include me in with the other idiots talking out of their asses.

You always seem miserable.

[thegeneral 3,116]

17 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Then they're late.  NJ has done this for decades.  When you title the thread a "Free lunch", the assumption is that it's for everyone.  Plus, the headline of the article says "universal".  Also, I have a VERY hard time believing that $56B is the cost for lunches for kids whose parents can't afford to pay for lunch, in the state.

Eight states now have some form of this. The program is providing lunches to all kids at school with no tickets, punch cards, what have you. Just go to school and you can eat a meal at lunch time.

This should def be the plan in every state.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,251]

50 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

1 in 8 kids in the United States are living with hunger. That's 9 million children.

https://www.nokidhungry.org/blog/how-many-kids-united-states-live-hunger

More than 34 million people, including 9 million children, in the United States are food insecure, according to the U. S. Department of Agriculture, meaning they lack consistent access to enough food for every person in their family to be healthy.

https://apnews.com/article/free-school-lunch-child-hunger-7d38b5a84e533129f507d76cc05c622f

That’s not starving. HTH. The resources are there. Malnutrition is a choice. But again, starving doesn’t exist, so it needs to stop being framed that way. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,519]

11 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Eight states now have some form of this. The program is providing lunches to all kids at school with no tickets, punch cards, what have you. Just go to school and you can eat a meal at lunch time.

This should def be the plan in every state.

IF it's solely for families who can't afford it, I'm ok with it.  To me though, $56B doesn't look like those are the only kids that this is applying too.  If there are 7 other states where every kid is getting a free lunch, like your link implies, because it says NOTHING about the kids who's parents can't afford it, then that just means there's now 8 states doing it wrong.

[thegeneral 3,116]

Just now, TBayXXXVII said:

IF it's solely for families who can't afford it, I'm ok with it.  To me though, $56B doesn't look like those are the only kids that this is applying too.  If there are 7 other states where every kid is getting a free lunch, like your link implies, because it says NOTHING about the kids who's parents can't afford it, then that just means there's now 8 states doing it wrong.

Sorry I misread your original post. Yes you are correct the program is to have all lunches free if you go to school. The stigma thing you described is probably the main reason why they are just making it the same.

[Thornton Melon 618]

If you can afford to feed your kids, I shouldn't be paying for their lunch. If you're low income and having trouble, I don't mind helping. As far as the "stigma" of kids being embarrassed to be getting a free school lunch: deal with it, kid. It'll make you stronger person overall.