Free and reduced lunches

[IlPadrino]

The other issue is that the parents don't find other means, so what we make the kids go hungry, so they don't learn as much in school, disrupt the class for the other kids, and then what happens, they fail out, don't get an education and lo and behold, what opportunity did they miss because we didn't give them a warm meal. Then we can blame them for not making a better life for themselves and get mad at them when they go on food stamps later in their lives just like their parents are. Feed the kids, give them at least the opportunity to learn.

I don't follow this is a cause-and-effect connection. Feeding != Opportunity To Learn. Public Eduction == Opportunity to Learn.

there are direct and indirect connections between good nutrition and the ability of a child to learn. there are many articles on the subject out there. here's one:

http://www.learningbenefits.net/Publicatio...ps/ResRep18.pdf

Thanks for the link... it's appreciated. Please note I didn't write "ability" to learn, I wrote "opportunity" to learn. I think that's where the public interest in schooling ends. Beyond that, it's up to parents or guardians to ensure the student makes the most of the opportunity.

 

[IlPadrino]

i am making it heard and known, right here, right now :laugh:
i think you're out of touch when it comes to how easy it is for someone with no money to uproot and move to a better life. especially in this economy with the number of jobs available.

But you've also got to make it count! I think we're getting off-track with the "move to a better life" angle. I am confident in my conviction that given all the public assistance available, *no* family has to go hungry or malnutritioned - even if they can't grow their own tomatoes.

But I surely cede your point... most of us are "out of touch" with a lot of this because we take parenting seriously (my son would get fed before I do!).

Here's a question: do you think it's fair to create public summer education programs that are only available to those who qualify for free or reduced lunch? A friend's kid really wanted to go to a summer science camp with his schoolmates... but he couldn't because the program was only available to those getting lunch assistance.

 

[IlPadrino]

OK... reading What is the relationship between child nutrition and school outcomes? has got me thinking...

The USDA has abandoned the food pyramid and replaced it with MyPlate, a dumbed-down version that makes mealtime selection pretty simple:

Government-provided school lunches have got to be healthy. Do children getting subsidized school lunches like the nutrition? Should schools force the nutrition on children who don't qualify for subsidized school lunch? Make everyone eat school lunches?

 

[PsychoNumber1]

Here's a question: do you think it's fair to create public summer education programs that are only available to those who qualify for free or reduced lunch? A friend's kid really wanted to go to a summer science camp with his schoolmates... but he couldn't because the program was only available to those getting lunch assistance.

i don't think it's fair at all. i grew up in that category of my parents made too much money to qualify for free programs and whatnot, but didn't make enough money to send me there either.

 

[PsychoNumber1]

OK... reading What is the relationship between child nutrition and school outcomes? has got me thinking...
The USDA has abandoned the food pyramid and replaced it with MyPlate, a dumbed-down version that makes mealtime selection pretty simple:

Government-provided school lunches have got to be healthy. Do children getting subsidized school lunches like the nutrition? Should schools force the nutrition on children who don't qualify for subsidized school lunch? Make everyone eat school lunches?

at my daughter's school they have rules on what's allowed and what isn't allowed in lunch/snack bags. they aren't allowed to have soda and they aren't supposed to bring things like candy or cookies either, as they are empty calories. the school lunches should have proper nutrition, but there are days where I don't understand why they ever selected to serve what they did. The other day my daughter wanted a school lunch instead of me making one like I usually do. It was "mexican haystacks," which was basically tortilla chips with cheese. They had the standard choice of fruit and milk as well, but still chips do not a lunch make. I understand that we as parents really need to step it up and make sure our children are well fed. I'm a big advocate of personal responsibility. However, I know there are people out there that ended up with kids who don't really care. It's important that there is something out there to help out the kids with crappy parents, because they are the victims. And maybe school should look at what the kids are being sent with, because even well off people make some bad decisions as well. it reminds of reading this a while back:

http://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/ff9...8_year_old_for/

 

[IlPadrino]

It's important that there is something out there to help out the kids with crappy parents, because they are the victims. And maybe school should look at what the kids are being sent with, because even well off people make some bad decisions as well. it reminds of reading this a while back:
http://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/ff9...8_year_old_for/

On this I think we agree completely... but it's a balance between personal responsibility and government intrusion. I don't think it's about public assistance to the poor.

 

[MGX]

We should call it 'nutritional terrorism' and bring up parents on war crime charges.

 

[jeb6294]

Free lunch?!? Where?!?

Right here baby!!!! Breakfast, lunch, and dinner...no charge. The commute home kind of sucks and the neighbors are kind of crabby so it's still not a great trade off.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

^What a whiner.

You'd complain if water was wet and the sky is blue.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

Also,
I need to introduce these people to some of my in-laws. Those old Italians can feed 20 people a month of $100 worth of pasta and sauce. Geesh.

(just might not have any meatballs)

That's what I was thinking. Might not be the most exciting meals, but you can live off $100/month easily. Based on the loaded shopping carts I've seen, I'd say $100/month is an outlier.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

The thing is that you can go cheaper on groceries if you buy low quality, super processed stuff. If you want to eat healthy it's kinda pricey.

 

[DVINNY]

^^ True.

But, I don't think I should have to pay for lazy ass bad parents to feed Filet Mignon's to their kids, when I don't spend the $$ to feed that kind of stuff to my own kids.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

^Agreed.

I'd be for healthy but no frills.

 

[Capt Worley PE]

^Which is why I think there should be an approved list of what you can buy with EBT. Better yet, take the EBT card in once a week and pick up a pre-selected box of food items for the family to use for the week.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

When I lived in a pretty poor, rundown town in VT, I'd regularly get stuck on line behind people trying to by alcohol, lotto tickets, cigarettes, etc. with food stamps. It was ridiculous.

 

[csb]

WIC has set guidelines for what can be purchased with that money. Our system is set up like a debit card and is just swiped at the cash register. I've been behind people who have the cart split up into the WIC food, which is cheerios and milk and whatnot and then they spend separately for root beer and other junk. For WIC the program has a set purpose- to make sure pregnant women and young children eat well.

Food stamps don't have a similar restrictions and I almost wonder about putting them in place. Here's the list from USDA for SNAP benefits:

“Junk Food” & Luxury Items The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) defines eligible food as any food or food product for home consumption and also includes seeds and plants which produce food for consumption by SNAP households. The Act precludes the following items from being purchased with SNAP benefits: alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, hot food and any food sold for on-premises consumption. Nonfood items such as pet foods, soaps, paper products, medicines and vitamins, household supplies, grooming items, and cosmetics, also are ineligible for purchase with SNAP benefits.

Soft drinks, candy, cookies, snack crackers, and ice cream are food items and are therefore eligible items

Seafood, steak, and bakery cakes are also food items and are therefore eligible items

Since the current definition of food is a specific part of the Act, any change to this definition would require action by a member of Congress. Several times in the history of SNAP, Congress had considered placing limits on the types of food that could be purchased with program benefits. However, they concluded that designating foods as luxury or non-nutritious would be administratively costly and burdensome.

http://www.fns.usda.gov/SNAP/retailers/eligible.htm

It raises the question for me- if I was out of a job and forced to take government assistance (God forbid), would I stick to the staples? Or would it be a nice reminder of better times to throw some Oreos in the cart every once in awhile? I know I currently shop with that mindset and I spend my own money. I think I'd have a harder time spending someone else's money on things like RedBull (which is eligible).

Of course, if I had no conscience about it all and I was spending the money like someone owed it to me, then hell yes I'd buy whatever I wanted and then I'd complain I didn't get enough.

 

[DVINNY]

Powdered Milk, and Gubment Cheese

 

[DVINNY]

It raises the question for me- if I was out of a job and forced to take government assistance (God forbid), would I stick to the staples? Or would it be a nice reminder of better times to throw some Oreos in the cart every once in awhile? I know I currently shop with that mindset and I spend my own money. I think I'd have a harder time spending someone else's money on things like RedBull (which is eligible).
Of course, if I had no conscience about it all and I was spending the money like someone owed it to me, then hell yes I'd buy whatever I wanted and then I'd complain I didn't get enough.

Honestly,

I think if either of us were out of our job, we would take these things into consideration, since we know it is people's hard earned tax money. And I'm sure there are many on current assistance that do think that way as well.

I think its the habital offenders that cheat the system and abuse it, is what makes most of us angry and ruin it for everyone.

 

[snickerd3]

back to the original topic sort of...It will be intereting to see what goes on for schools around here. It's still several years away before I have to deal with that but it will like be one of those 80-90% are free/reduced lunch program. But I've noticed there is sort of a generation gap. Those families with kids middleschool/highschool age right now are a little better off than those in town with elementary school and younger aged kids.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

Food stamps don't have a similar restrictions and I almost wonder about putting them in place. Here's the list from USDA for SNAP benefits:

CSB - When I said 'food stamps' I meant in the generic sense. These folks had a debit card like thing they would swipe for covered items.

Watching them argue with the cashier about how they should be able to get cigarettes on government assistance money was both amusing and sad.

I think its the habital offenders that cheat the system and abuse it, is what makes most of us angry and ruin it for everyone.

Everyone runs into hard times now and again, and I have no problem with government assistance for those people for a limited time until they are back on their feet. The chronic moochers not even trying are the ones that piss me off.