Free lunches at school

[Heracles 417]

Because you know what a GOOD mother will do to feed her child? With no other means possible, armed robbery and murder. Anything.

A good mother will do nothing of the sort.

Exactly. My parents had very hard times raising their own 3 and my aunt's 2 children after my aunt passed away at young age. It was hard for my parents to take on two more kids while they had a hard time providing for their own. But my cousins were about to be separated after having lost their mother and my parents decided that that ain't going to happen. So, we all cut back some more, dad took on a second job on the weekends and they raised all five of us without ever committing any armed robbery or murder. That is the most ridiculous piece of BS I have read in a long time.

Exactly. My parents migrated to a country with 50 cents to their name. Yet managed to raise 4 kids and put us through school. Back in the 70's Australia had absolutely no welfare programs might I add. Zilch.

[Killer_Clown_2009 0]

He probably isn't trying to do away with the lunch program - he probably doesn't even care about it. I think he wanted to get a bunch of people pissed off, knowing full well that all but the most selfish of people would support food for kids who need it. His idea of something "funny".

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

He probably isn't trying to do away with the lunch program - he probably doesn't even care about it. I think he wanted to get a bunch of people pissed off, knowing full well that all but the most selfish of people would support food for kids who need it. His idea of something "funny".

I think we have a winner! Though I'm sure he gets all worked up about it all the same.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

My parents migrated to a country with 50 cents to their name.

Some here would say your parents were being irresponsible.

[Killer_Clown_2009 0]

Charles' sign, "If you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em" comes to mind. Lisa must not be wearing her bifocals.

That still doesn't prove he wants kids to starve. Does it?

Let's ask him: Charles, are you advocating children starve?

Only the children of parents who can't afford to feed them - those parents should not have "bred" and the kids should never have been born. Starving those kids to death rectifies the problem.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

He probably isn't trying to do away with the lunch program - he probably doesn't even care about it. I think he wanted to get a bunch of people pissed off, knowing full well that all but the most selfish of people would support food for kids who need it. His idea of something "funny".

I think we have a winner! Though I'm sure he gets all worked up about it all the same.

Only when he listens to Hannity, Coulter, Limbaugh and Savage...his daily source for having an opinion about something.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Because you know what a GOOD mother will do to feed her child? With no other means possible, armed robbery and murder. Anything.

A good mother will do nothing of the sort.

Exactly. My parents had very hard times raising their own 3 and my aunt's 2 children after my aunt passed away at young age. It was hard for my parents to take on two more kids while they had a hard time providing for their own. But my cousins were about to be separated after having lost their mother and my parents decided that that ain't going to happen. So, we all cut back some more, dad took on a second job on the weekends and they raised all five of us without ever committing any armed robbery or murder. That is the most ridiculous piece of BS I have read in a long time.

Exactly. My parents migrated to a country with 50 cents to their name. Yet managed to raise 4 kids and put us through school. Back in the 70's Australia had absolutely no welfare programs might I add. Zilch.

That doesn't mean that they wouldn't have used or taken benefit from such programmes were they available.

[Heracles 417]

So what's the solution, let the kids starve because of the bad decisions made by their parents?

No the parents should suffer for their decisions and not everyone else. If your poor and not prepared to do the extra work; don't have kids..

Everyone goes on and on about their 'rights' and their 'right to choose' but conveniently, when they ###### up, someone else has to deal with it and pay for it. Welcome to the 21century where we are supposed to be intelligent and advanced.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

He probably isn't trying to do away with the lunch program - he probably doesn't even care about it. I think he wanted to get a bunch of people pissed off, knowing full well that all but the most selfish of people would support food for kids who need it. His idea of something "funny".

This is about as close to a complex debate as C&M can get. Though the substance of the man's claims can I think be judged by the length of his contributions.

Its easy to write-off as complex as public assistance programme for the poor in a one-liner (usually grounded in emotive rhetoric), less easy to actually explore what's wrong with it.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

So what's the solution, let the kids starve because of the bad decisions made by their parents?

No the parents should suffer for their decisions and not everyone else. If your poor and not prepared to do the extra work; don't have kids..

Everyone goes on and on about their 'rights' and their 'right to choose' but conveniently, when they ###### up, someone else has to deal with it and pay for it. Welcome to the 21century where we are supposed to be intelligent and advanced.

How do the parents suffer by taking lunch away from the kids?

I guess we can safely say you support abortion rights. Oh wait.....

[Heracles 417]

Because you know what a GOOD mother will do to feed her child? With no other means possible, armed robbery and murder. Anything.

A good mother will do nothing of the sort.

Exactly. My parents had very hard times raising their own 3 and my aunt's 2 children after my aunt passed away at young age. It was hard for my parents to take on two more kids while they had a hard time providing for their own. But my cousins were about to be separated after having lost their mother and my parents decided that that ain't going to happen. So, we all cut back some more, dad took on a second job on the weekends and they raised all five of us without ever committing any armed robbery or murder. That is the most ridiculous piece of BS I have read in a long time.

Exactly. My parents migrated to a country with 50 cents to their name. Yet managed to raise 4 kids and put us through school. Back in the 70's Australia had absolutely no welfare programs might I add. Zilch.

That doesn't mean that they wouldn't have used or taken benefit from such programmes were they available.

Point being they did all of this without relying on somebody else. Sometimes my dad worked double shifts.

It seems the current attitude of the poor towards others more successful is "###### them. Take what you can and give back nothing".

So what's the solution, let the kids starve because of the bad decisions made by their parents?

No the parents should suffer for their decisions and not everyone else. If your poor and not prepared to do the extra work; don't have kids..

Everyone goes on and on about their 'rights' and their 'right to choose' but conveniently, when they ###### up, someone else has to deal with it and pay for it. Welcome to the 21century where we are supposed to be intelligent and advanced.

How do the parents suffer by taking lunch away from the kids?

I guess we can safely say you support abortion rights. Oh wait.....

###### oath I do. We don't need any more bums in this world..

[Peikko 1,575]

QUOTE(Purple_Hibiscus @ Aug 25 2007, 08:19 PM)

Right, so, just because X decides to spend Y amount of their welfare on something that you don't think they should, everyone should have their allowance cut by Y amount because this is an indication that the welfare allowance is too high? There's logic for you...

So you're just one more person that has trouble distinguishing between wants and needs.

Nope, I am one more person who realises that just because one person makes a bad choice with limited resources it doesn't automatically mean that the system is paying too much in welfare, so much so that free school meal programmes are an irresponsible and reckless way to spend tax dollars.

I am also one more person who recognises that while it may irk you/whoever that people don't spend their welfare cheques in a way you deem responsible, it is not possible from that to draw the conclusion that welfare programmes are somehow overwhelmingly generous and should be lowered or scrapped.

I am also one more person who recognises that there is no cost effective way of making sure that absolutely everyone on welfare is honestly claiming that benefit. There may be people who wish to supervise the lives of those on welfare, but that isn't what being in a free society means. Being free means you have to allow people to be stupid some of the time. Incidentally, I am not against education for those who make bad financial decisions, ultimately, that is the only way forward. However, I am against the invasion of privacy that things like auditing would entail (on top of the costs) and I don't think you will find any politician advocating this kind of solution to what is probably a remarkably small amount of cheating if you look at the overall picture.

Edited August 26, 2007 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Krikit 1,164]

Welcome to the 21century where we are supposed to be intelligent and advanced.

Oh, the irony.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Because you know what a GOOD mother will do to feed her child? With no other means possible, armed robbery and murder. Anything.

A good mother will do nothing of the sort.

Exactly. My parents had very hard times raising their own 3 and my aunt's 2 children after my aunt passed away at young age. It was hard for my parents to take on two more kids while they had a hard time providing for their own. But my cousins were about to be separated after having lost their mother and my parents decided that that ain't going to happen. So, we all cut back some more, dad took on a second job on the weekends and they raised all five of us without ever committing any armed robbery or murder. That is the most ridiculous piece of BS I have read in a long time.

Exactly. My parents migrated to a country with 50 cents to their name. Yet managed to raise 4 kids and put us through school. Back in the 70's Australia had absolutely no welfare programs might I add. Zilch.

That doesn't mean that they wouldn't have used or taken benefit from such programmes were they available.

Point being they did all of this without relying on somebody else. Sometimes my dad worked double shifts.

It seems the current attitude of the poor towards others more successful is "###### them. Take what you can and give back nothing".

Come on - that's just another generalisation. You don't know that. I don't understand the need to cast aspersions on people - based on unqualified assumptions about their behaviour. There's plenty of people on VJ struggling with the poverty guidelines on the I-864. Is it fair to call people lazy just because they are poor?

Do you honestly believe that there aren't poor people out there who busting their a$$es to pay their bills and provide for their families but still can't make the grade? Given how easy it is to get into debt these days - I think its easy to make judgements about complete strangers that would be best restricted to ourselves.

I guess we're lucky that neither of us need public assistance.

[Killer_Clown_2009 0]

Welcome to the 21century where we are supposed to be intelligent and advanced.

Oh, the irony.

haha ... for sure!