No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
The Spartan
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4406
Joined: 2005-03-12 05:56pm
Location: Houston

No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by The Spartan »

Apologies for the title but that was what was on MSNBC.com
No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats
Some start 'cheese sandwich policy' for kids whose parents don't pay
The Associated Press
updated 10:33 a.m. CT, Wed., Feb. 25, 2009
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - A cold cheese sandwich, fruit and a milk carton might not seem like much of a meal — but that's what's on the menu for students in New Mexico's largest school district without their lunch money.

Faced with mounting unpaid lunch charges in the economic downturn, Albuquerque Public Schools last month instituted a "cheese sandwich policy," serving the alternative meals to children whose parents fail to pick up their lunch tab.

Such policies have become a necessity for schools seeking to keep budgets in the black while ensuring children don't go hungry. School districts including those in Chula Vista, Calif., Hillsborough County, Fla., and Lynnwood, Wash., have also taken to serving cheese sandwiches to lunch debtors.

Critics argue the cold meals are a form of punishment for children whose parents can't afford to pay.

"We've heard stories from moms coming in saying their child was pulled out of the lunch line and given a cheese sandwich," said Nancy Pope, director of the New Mexico Collaborative to End Hunger. "One woman said her daughter never wants to go back to school."

Mixed reviews
Some Albuquerque parents have tearfully pleaded with school board members to stop singling out their children because they're poor, while others have flooded talk radio shows thanking the district for imposing a policy that commands parental responsibility.

Second-grader Danessa Vigil said she will never eat sliced cheese again. She had to eat cheese sandwiches because her mother couldn't afford to give her lunch money while her application for free lunch was being processed.

"Every time I eat it, it makes me feel like I want to throw up," the 7-year-old said.

Her mother, Darlene Vigil, said there are days she can't spare lunch money for her two daughters.

"Some parents don't have even $1 sometimes," the 27-year-old single mother said. "If they do, it's for something else, like milk at home. There are some families that just don't have it and that's the reason they're not paying."

The School Nutrition Association recently surveyed nutrition directors from 38 states and found more than half of school districts have seen an increase in the number of students charging meals, while 79 percent saw an increase in the number of free lunches served over the last year.

'Families struggling'
In New Mexico, nearly 204,000 low-income students — about three-fifths of public school students — received free or reduced-price lunches at the beginning of the school year, according to the state Public Education Department.

"What you are seeing is families struggling and having a really hard time, and school districts are struggling as well," said Crystal FitzSimons of the national Food Research and Action Center.

In Albuquerque, unpaid lunch charges hovered around $55,000 in 2006. That jumped to $130,000 at the end of the 2007-08 school year. It was $140,000 through the first five months of this school year.

Charges were on pace to reach $300,000 by the end of the year. Mary Swift, director of Albuquerque's food and nutrition services, said her department had no way to absorb that debt as it had in the past.

"We can't use any federal lunch program money to pay what they call bad debt. It has to come out of the general budget and of course that takes it from some other department," Swift said.


'Dignity and respect'
With the new policy, the school district has collected just over $50,000 from parents since the beginning of the year. It also identified 2,000 students eligible to receive free or reduced-price lunches, and more children in the lunch program means more federal dollars for the district.

School officials said the policy was under consideration for some time and parents were notified last fall. Families with unpaid charges are reminded with an automated phone call each night and notes are sent home with children once a week.

Swift added that the cheese sandwiches — about 80 of the 46,000 meals the district serves daily — can be considered a "courtesy meal," rather than an alternate meal.

Some districts, she noted, don't allow children without money to eat anything.

Albuquerque Public Schools "has historically gone above and beyond as far as treating children with dignity and respect and trying to do what's best with for the child and I think this is just another example," Swift said.
I have to admit I'm conflicted by this. On the one hand, the parents are poor and the children do need to eat, but on the other, that doesn't necessarily entitle the child to any particular meal assuming nutritional needs are met by what they do eat. Though I don't go so far as to consider it punishment. Hell, from what I remember at school, a cheese sandwich, milk and piece of fruit could be healthier than what might otherwise be served.

I just keep going around and around in my head.
The Gentleman from Texas abstains. Discourteously.
Image
PRFYNAFBTFC-Vice Admiral: MFS Masturbating Walrus :: Omine subtilite Odobenus rosmarus masturbari
Soy un perdedor.
"WHO POOPED IN A NORMAL ROOM?!"-Commander William T. Riker
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by General Zod »

Sounds like a way of fucking over poor parents to me. Especially the bit about how some districts aren't serving anything if they can't pay. Even then I can't see how a cold cheese sandwich is enough to get anyone through the day.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Kanastrous »

If people want to regard receiving one category of free nutritious food as an insult when contrasted to receiving a different category of nutritious food for which others pay their own way, fuck them.

They should be thankful that there's free food available for them, at all.

This business of charity recipients expecting the charity to be designed to feed their egos as well as their bellies is just perverse.

I don't object to free food for hungry people in a financial bind - hell, it's essential to provide it. But fielding complaints regarding the degree to which people feel good about it is pure bullshit.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by General Zod »

Kanastrous wrote:If people want to regard receiving one category of free nutritious food as an insult when contrasted to receiving a different category of nutritious food for which others pay their own way, fuck them.
The public school system itself is already free, paid for courtesy of taxes. If they were really trying to save money from their budget, somehow I get the feeling that there were other areas they could have cut it out of that were arguably far less essential than making sure the students from poorer families had something to eat every day.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Kanastrous »

I don't know. The PS's mission is to educate, not feed; so far as I understand it the practice of offering school lunches at all was implemented because enough students were coming to school hungry that it was actually interfering with the education mission. If the school has to offer a minimum number of calories to students to improve academic performance, that's one thing. Assuming responsibility for feeding-for-the-sake-of-feeding is something else, and not a part of the schools' purpose.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
User avatar
Zixinus
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 6663
Joined: 2007-06-19 12:48pm
Location: In Seth the Blitzspear
Contact:

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Zixinus »

"One woman said her daughter never wants to go back to school."
Boy, did I say that line for better reasons.
Credo!
Chat with me on Skype if you want to talk about writing, ideas or if you want a test-reader! PM for address.
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Kanastrous »

Same here.

Is this a uniquely American thing, being given what you need and then bitching because the way it was given to you didn't boost your ego? I mean, yes, in the case of a little kid feeling badly that's one thing, but there is no such excuse for adults, and I can't help but wonder how much of the child's bad feelings are thanks to the way adults around her handled things.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
User avatar
Spyder
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4465
Joined: 2002-09-03 03:23am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Contact:

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Spyder »

That's above what we get. At any of the schools I went to, you either bring lunch, bring cash or go hungry.
:D
User avatar
AMT
Jedi Knight
Posts: 865
Joined: 2008-11-21 12:26pm

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by AMT »

Plus, if the parents are too poor to afford a dollar a day, they can apply for the free/reduced lunch program. The article itself states that the policy has helped ID 2,000 kids who might not have known they could do that, which brings in more fed money, which helps the overall situation.
User avatar
Lagmonster
Master Control Program
Master Control Program
Posts: 7719
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:53am
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Lagmonster »

This would be an excellent time to ask how good of a football team some of these schools have.

Okay, I realize the one with the hungry 2nd grader probably doesn't have a million-dollar setup for sports, but I still bet I organize my budget priorities differently than a New Mexico school.
Note: I'm semi-retired from the board, so if you need something, please be patient.
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Kanastrous »

As an aside, that's what I tell my alma mater whenever they make the mistake of calling me to ask for a handout: still got that sports program? Well, if you need money for operations and faculty, you can just draw the funds from there.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
User avatar
Themightytom
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2818
Joined: 2007-12-22 11:11am
Location: United States

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Themightytom »

Kanastrous wrote:If people want to regard receiving one category of free nutritious food as an insult when contrasted to receiving a different category of nutritious food for which others pay their own way, fuck them.
They should be thankful that there's free food available for them, at all.
You are oversimplifying the shit out of this. from a practical standpoint, thats NOT a nutritious meal, it won't accomplish the goal of improving children's academic perfromance to a significant extent, all it does is stigmatize them when the other children realize they are poor. Awesome. They didn't have enough barriers comin from poor families, now they not only get malnurished but they are publicly humiliated. Do you jog over to fat people at the gym and speed up the treadmill on them because you think that will improve their performance?
This business of charity recipients expecting the charity to be designed to feed their egos as well as their bellies is just perverse.
Whats perverse is you describing it as a "business", your inability to see the difference between charity and an educational support, and most of all your apparent unfamiliarity with the concept of ego and the role it actually DOES play in education.
I don't object to free food for hungry people in a financial bind - hell, it's essential to provide it. But fielding complaints regarding the degree to which people feel good about it is pure bullshit.
Right lets implement a policy and just assume it works, why bother to check. Oh right, you see this all as charity and not a rational attempt to improve academic performance.
Is this a uniquely American thing, being given what you need and then bitching because the way it was given to you didn't boost your ego? I mean, yes, in the case of a little kid feeling badly that's one thing, but there is no such excuse for adults, and I can't help but wonder how much of the child's bad feelings are thanks to the way adults around her handled things.
Are you eager for it to be a uniquely American thing? And by american are we talking about Americans North and South, or specifically the US, I can't keep up with your poppycock.

Your all or nothing philosophy is neither rational nor effective, regardless of what responsibility the parents bear in raising their kids, there is a solid case for providing food at the schools in order to improve academic performance and there is NOT a legitimate reason why schools can't develop an alternate cost effective menu that actually DOES meet nutritional requirements in addition to not stigmatizing the children whose parents aren't paying. This was a half assed knee jerk reaction from frustrated school officials who didn't bother thinking it through. CHEESE AND MILK aren't cheap, that particular menu choice smacks of tradition more than anything else.

All of that being said, i personally wouldn't mind seeing the school lunch program expanded to include a dinner at afterschools, and massively reduce both the weekly alotment and variety of choice to adults without a disability. Feed the kids and let the parents remain motivated to find work.

"Since when is "the west" a nation?"-Styphon
"ACORN= Cobra obviously." AMT
This topic is... oh Village Idiot. Carry on then.--Havok
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by General Zod »

Given the school winds up assuming the role of in loco parentis while the children are there, you could feasibly make the argument that refusing to provide proper nourishment the way some of these schools are outright doing could constitute a form of abuse. We punish parents that withhold proper nutrition from their children when they have every ability to already, as it is. Why not schools?
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
AMT
Jedi Knight
Posts: 865
Joined: 2008-11-21 12:26pm

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by AMT »

General Zod wrote:Given the school winds up assuming the role of in loco parentis while the children are there, you could feasibly make the argument that refusing to provide proper nourishment the way some of these schools are outright doing could constitute a form of abuse. We punish parents that withhold proper nutrition from their children when they have every ability to already, as it is. Why not schools?
Because despite the tendency to force schools to assume the role... they don't actually have that role? Schools do not have the legal authority, nor the responsibility, that a parent does to their child. If they do, I'd like to see where it is in the books.
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Kanastrous »

Themightytom wrote:You are oversimplifying the shit out of this. from a practical standpoint, thats NOT a nutritious meal,
% Daily
Value*

Calories 670g
Total Fat 46 g 71%
Saturated Fat 17 g 85%
Cholesterol 75 mg 25%
Sodium 935 mg 39%
Total Carbohydrates 40 g 13%
Dietary Fiber 4 g 16%
Sugars 8 g
Protein 26 g
Calcium 580 mg

^ estimated nutritional value of a 'cheese sandwich.' Doesn't actually look that bad, although I will have to defer to an actual nutritionist's assessment.
Themightytom wrote:it won't accomplish the goal of improving children's academic perfromance to a significant extent,
Are you a nutritionist?
Themightytom wrote:all it does is stigmatize them when the other children realize they are poor. Awesome.
Back to precious precious feelings. Sorry, an unfortunate reality of life in school is being picked on, bullied, mocked and stigmatized. Is it bad and undesirable? Yes. Is it inevitable? Also yes. That's a discipline issue, not a lunch-menu issue.
Themightytom wrote:They didn't have enough barriers comin from poor families, now they not only get malnurished but they are publicly humiliated.
To whatever degree they may be malnourished, it's not thanks to receiving a cheese sandwich for lunch. How about just a scintilla of parental responsibility?
Themightytom wrote:
Kanastrous wrote:This business of charity recipients expecting the charity to be designed to feed their egos as well as their bellies is just perverse.
Whats perverse is you describing it as a "business",
Perhaps you think I mean 'business' in the sense of a for-profit enterprise, which is not the sense in which I am using the word. I mean 'business' in the sense of stuff, nonsense, foolishness, crapola, etcetera.
Themightytom wrote:your inability to see the difference between charity and an educational support,
This appears to be designed to serve both ends. Although giving people something they need for which they cannot or do not pay is generally considered 'charity.'
Themightytom wrote:and most of all your apparent unfamiliarity with the concept of ego and the role it actually DOES play in education.
I managed to complete a public-school education plus undergraduate degree without anyone making much effort to cater to my precious ego. Much the opposite, in fact. Am I some kind of special person for having managed this? Of course not. Anyone else ought to be able to do more or less the same.
Themightytom wrote:
Kanastrous wrote:Is this a uniquely American thing, being given what you need and then bitching because the way it was given to you didn't boost your ego? I mean, yes, in the case of a little kid feeling badly that's one thing, but there is no such excuse for adults, and I can't help but wonder how much of the child's bad feelings are thanks to the way adults around her handled things.
Are you eager for it to be a uniquely American thing?
Not really. I don't think it would speak very well for Americans, if it were. But I haven't followed anything similar happening elsewhere, and a jumbo-sized sense of entitlement and over-inflated ego *do* seem to be particularly American qualities, so far as I have seen.
Themightytom wrote:All of that being said, i personally wouldn't mind seeing the school lunch program expanded to include a dinner at afterschools, and massively reduce both the weekly alotment and variety of choice to adults without a disability. Feed the kids and let the parents remain motivated to find work.
Turn schools into feeding centers, and leave the rest of the family unit to fend for themselves?

I suppose it could be tried.
Last edited by Kanastrous on 2009-02-25 03:41pm, edited 3 times in total.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
User avatar
Rogue 9
Scrapping TIEs since 1997
Posts: 18684
Joined: 2003-11-12 01:10pm
Location: Classified
Contact:

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Rogue 9 »

AMT wrote:
General Zod wrote:Given the school winds up assuming the role of in loco parentis while the children are there, you could feasibly make the argument that refusing to provide proper nourishment the way some of these schools are outright doing could constitute a form of abuse. We punish parents that withhold proper nutrition from their children when they have every ability to already, as it is. Why not schools?
Because despite the tendency to force schools to assume the role... they don't actually have that role? Schools do not have the legal authority, nor the responsibility, that a parent does to their child. If they do, I'd like to see where it is in the books.
It's longstanding jurisprudence that they do. Suing a pre-university school over violations of the rights adult citizens enjoy (free speech, for example) is bound to fail for this reason.
It's Rogue, not Rouge!

HAB | KotL | VRWC/ELC/CDA | TRotR | The Anti-Confederate | Sluggite | Gamer | Blogger | Staff Reporter | Student | Musician
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Kanastrous »

This is drifting a little bit, but if a school has parental-type authority over its students, where do parents get the right to object to content in any given school's curriculum? Or the right to object to any exercise of the school's authority over their child?
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
User avatar
Erik von Nein
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1747
Joined: 2005-06-25 04:27am
Location: Boy Hell. Much nicer than Girl Hell.
Contact:

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Erik von Nein »

Kanastrous wrote:
Themightytom wrote:You are oversimplifying the shit out of this. from a practical standpoint, thats NOT a nutritious meal,
% Daily
Value*

Calories 670g
Total Fat 46 g 71%
Saturated Fat 17 g 85%
Cholesterol 75 mg 25%
Sodium 935 mg 39%
Total Carbohydrates 40 g 13%
Dietary Fiber 4 g 16%
Sugars 8 g
Protein 26 g
Calcium 580 mg

^ estimated nutritional value of a 'cheese sandwich.' Doesn't actually look that bad, although I will have to defer to an actual nutritionist's assessment.
That's abhorrent. 670 calories (total, for kids, being around 1,500 max), over 2/3rds of which are coming from fat? 85% of your daily alloted saturated fat (which is, of course, different for children, meaning less)? 71% of your total fat intake for the day? This should only be some kid's meal if it meant that kid was also keeping to a diet that restricted fat from other sources, especially saturated fat.
"To make an apple pie from scratch you must first invent the universe."
— Carl Sagan

Image
User avatar
Coyote
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 12464
Joined: 2002-08-23 01:20am
Location: The glorious Sun-Barge! Isis, Isis, Ra,Ra,Ra!
Contact:

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Coyote »

For some families that are extremely poor, the school lunch is the only opportunity the kids have each day for a guaranteed properly-balanced meal. The cheese sandwich special won't make up for that.

Going without food sucks, hard. I was in a very poor situation when I got out of the Army and lived in California for awhile; I had minimum-wage jobs and some part-time jobs and I was cut back to bare essentials on everything, food in particular. I'd go for months on things like cheese sandwiches and ramen noodle packs, and trust me your mental acutity suffers. On rare occassions I'd go to Denny's of all places for a "nutritious" meal and actually get some green salad, a small steak, and a baked potato and for 24 hours, I could feel the difference a good rounded meal made.

The kids are required by law to be at the school, and the school (I'd think) would be required by law to provide a meal that meets government mandated educational requirements as set by the Dept' of Health. I agree-- take it from the sports program for a change.
Something about Libertarianism always bothered me. Then one day, I realized what it was:
Libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to the phrase, "Work Will Make You Free."


In Libertarianism, there is no Government, so the Bosses are free to exploit the Workers.
In Communism, there is no Government, so the Workers are free to exploit the Bosses.
So in Libertarianism, man exploits man, but in Communism, its the other way around!

If all you want to do is have some harmless, mindless fun, go H3RE INST3ADZ0RZ!!
Grrr! Fight my Brute, you pansy!
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Kanastrous »

No argument with taking necessary funds from sports, if the funds are there.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
User avatar
Raw Shark
Stunt Driver / Babysitter
Posts: 7944
Joined: 2005-11-24 09:35am
Location: One Mile Up

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Raw Shark »

Erik von Nein wrote:That's abhorrent. 670 calories (total, for kids, being around 1,500 max), over 2/3rds of which are coming from fat? 85% of your daily alloted saturated fat (which is, of course, different for children, meaning less)? 71% of your total fat intake for the day? This should only be some kid's meal if it meant that kid was also keeping to a diet that restricted fat from other sources, especially saturated fat.
I think we need to know what the paying kids are eating in the same school district before we can start basing any judgments on that angle of it. My school served pizza, greasy taco salad, and all kinds of other stuff that was probably high in saturated fat for the regular meals and called it good as long as it had enough calories, protein, calcium, etc and came with an orange or banana. By that standard, the cheese sandwiches + milk + fruit are fine.

"Do I really look like a guy with a plan? Y'know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars. I wouldn't know what to do with one if I caught it! Y'know, I just do things..." --The Joker
User avatar
Erik von Nein
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1747
Joined: 2005-06-25 04:27am
Location: Boy Hell. Much nicer than Girl Hell.
Contact:

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Erik von Nein »

Well, yeah. Obviously comparing it to something that's even worse is going to be in the cheese sandwich's favor. Though, the milk and fruit is a decent enough start (depending on the fat % on in the milk).

Though, if done in moderation those foods wouldn't be too bad, like if it were a once-a-week thing. None of that should be served daily.
"To make an apple pie from scratch you must first invent the universe."
— Carl Sagan

Image
User avatar
Raw Shark
Stunt Driver / Babysitter
Posts: 7944
Joined: 2005-11-24 09:35am
Location: One Mile Up

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Raw Shark »

Erik von Nein wrote:Well, yeah. Obviously comparing it to something that's even worse is going to be in the cheese sandwich's favor. Though, the milk and fruit is a decent enough start (depending on the fat % on in the milk).

Though, if done in moderation those foods wouldn't be too bad, like if it were a once-a-week thing. None of that should be served daily.
And if that "something that's even worse" in terms of saturated fat is what is on the menu for the kids who pay in full, and if saturated fat content was our standard, then the poor kids are actually at an advantage.

"Do I really look like a guy with a plan? Y'know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars. I wouldn't know what to do with one if I caught it! Y'know, I just do things..." --The Joker
User avatar
Themightytom
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2818
Joined: 2007-12-22 11:11am
Location: United States

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Themightytom »

Kanastrous wrote: Value*

Calories 670g
Total Fat 46 g 71%
Saturated Fat 17 g 85%
Cholesterol 75 mg 25%
Sodium 935 mg 39%
Total Carbohydrates 40 g 13%
Dietary Fiber 4 g 16%
Sugars 8 g
Protein 26 g
Calcium 580 mg

^ estimated nutritional value of a 'cheese sandwich.' Doesn't actually look that bad, although I will have to defer to an actual nutritionist's assessment.


Are you a nutritionist?
No but I know that most unvaried diets tend to vitamin deficiencies and obesity, if you need verification of THAT let me know, as it is common knowledge. Even if a Cheese sandwich met the dietary requirements of one meal, the repetition of having every DAY will have harmful long term effects, thats why they vary the school menu.



Themightytom wrote:all it does is stigmatize them when the other children realize they are poor. Awesome.
Back to precious precious feelings. Sorry, an unfortunate reality of life in school is being picked on, bullied, mocked and stigmatized. Is it bad and undesirable? Yes. Is it inevitable? Also yes. That's a discipline issue, not a lunch-menu issue.
Are you a guidance counselor? And if you are about to ask, no I'm not but I AM two thirds of the way through a MA in School counseling. incidently, guess what families most of the bullies come from, HINT: its NOT the ones with lunch money.

Your "Unfortunate reality" is created by idiots who think patterns of behavior are "inevitiable" as opposed to "Understandable" and "Controllable"
Themightytom wrote:They didn't have enough barriers comin from poor families, now they not only get malnurished but they are publicly humiliated.
To whatever degree they may be malnourished, it's not thanks to receiving a cheese sandwich for lunch. How about just a scintilla of parental responsibility?
How about you stop treating this as an all or nothing argument. just because I don't support the school districts' tactics in debt recovery doesn't mean I don't think the parents shouldn't be held responsible for not paying bills, on the other hand I'm not such a dumbass that I would, in the middle of what is being described ad naseum as a depression, assume that every family that can't pay for school lunch is irresponsible.
Themightytom wrote:
Kanastrous wrote:This business of charity recipients expecting the charity to be designed to feed their egos as well as their bellies is just perverse.
Whats perverse is you describing it as a "business",
Perhaps you think I mean 'business' in the sense of a for-profit enterprise, which is not the sense in which I am using the word. I mean 'business' in the sense of stuff, nonsense, foolishness, crapola, etcetera.
Nooo you meant it with the effete pseudo intellectual connotation.
Themightytom wrote:your inability to see the difference between charity and an educational support,
This appears to be designed to serve both ends. Although giving people something they need for which they cannot or do not pay is generally considered 'charity.'
Charity is applied without strategy more for the personal gratification of the giver than the benefit of the reciever. If this were "Truly" designed to serve both ends they would use cost effective products that accomplish the nutritional goals without stigmatizing the children. They WANT the children to complain tearfully to their parents, to get the parents to pay their bills, regardless of the long erm damage to the child, or the actual ability of the parents to pay their bills. its a short term solution with lasting repercussions.
Themightytom wrote:and most of all your apparent unfamiliarity with the concept of ego and the role it actually DOES play in education.
I managed to complete a public-school education plus undergraduate degree without anyone making much effort to cater to my precious ego. Much the opposite, in fact. Am I some kind of special person for having managed this? Of course not. Anyone else ought to be able to do more or less the same.
right because everyone comes from the same situation has access to the same resources etc.

Not really. I don't think it would speak very well for Americans, if it were. But I haven't followed anything similar happening elsewhere, and a jumbo-sized sense of entitlement and over-inflated ego *do* seem to be particularly American qualities, so far as I have seen.
So as both of your arguments revolve around what you have "Seen" what you are really saying is that Americans are more visible than other...er...continetal representatives....

Turn schools into feeding centers, and leave the rest of the family unit to fend for themselves?

I suppose it could be tried.
It has the self correcting advantage that the more it divorces participants from their original family values, the less desireable the patterns of behavior initially responsible are. therefore if a family wants to pass on its culture and socialize its children, they have to be in a position to do so.

Of course THIS would happen more often as starving adults look for a solution

http://news.scotsman.com/topstories/Sex ... 3343479.jp

"Since when is "the west" a nation?"-Styphon
"ACORN= Cobra obviously." AMT
This topic is... oh Village Idiot. Carry on then.--Havok
Kanastrous
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 6464
Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
Location: SoCal

Re: No free lunch: Schools get tough on deadbeats

Post by Kanastrous »

Themightytom wrote:most unvaried diets tend to vitamin deficiencies and obesity, if you need verification of THAT let me know, as it is common knowledge. Even if a Cheese sandwich met the dietary requirements of one meal, the repetition of having every DAY will have harmful long term effects, thats why they vary the school menu.
One meal out of three can probably remain unchanging without being harmful. The school can take responsibility for one out of three meals per day; the parents can take responsibility for the remaining two.
Themightytom wrote:
Kanastrous wrote:
Themightytom wrote:all it does is stigmatize them when the other children realize they are poor. Awesome.
Back to precious precious feelings. Sorry, an unfortunate reality of life in school is being picked on, bullied, mocked and stigmatized. Is it bad and undesirable? Yes. Is it inevitable? Also yes. That's a discipline issue, not a lunch-menu issue.
Are you a guidance counselor? And if you are about to ask, no I'm not but I AM two thirds of the way through a MA in School counseling. incidently, guess what families most of the bullies come from, HINT: its NOT the ones with lunch money.

Your "Unfortunate reality" is created by idiots who think patterns of behavior are "inevitiable" as opposed to "Understandable" and "Controllable"
The unfortunate reality remains that efforts on the part of counselors will never put an end to picking-on, bullying, mocking and stigmatization. It's true that you can probably moderate the problem, which is worthwhile, but you are not going to eradicate it. And since you can't eradicate it, it's something the students will (a) have to continue dealing with and (b) something they'd better develop the ability to deal with, sooner rather than later. The point remains that there's a difference between feeding people at state expense when necessary, and making them feel good about the fact that they are being fed at state expense (which frankly is not something that anyone should be encouraged to feel good about).
Themightytom wrote:
Kanastrous wrote:
Themightytom wrote:They didn't have enough barriers comin from poor families, now they not only get malnurished but they are publicly humiliated.
To whatever degree they may be malnourished, it's not thanks to receiving a cheese sandwich for lunch. How about just a scintilla of parental responsibility?
How about you stop treating this as an all or nothing argument. just because I don't support the school districts' tactics in debt recovery doesn't mean I don't think the parents shouldn't be held responsible for not paying bills,
Okay, what is your alternate recommendation for an effective way to handle the debts incurred?
Themightytom wrote:
Kanastrous wrote: This appears to be designed to serve both ends. Although giving people something they need for which they cannot or do not pay is generally considered 'charity.'
Charity is applied without strategy more for the personal gratification of the giver than the benefit of the reciever.
Bullshit. Maybe that's how you personally regard charity.
Themightytom wrote:If this were "Truly" designed to serve both ends they would use cost effective products that accomplish the nutritional goals without stigmatizing the children. They WANT the children to complain tearfully to their parents, to get the parents to pay their bills, regardless of the long erm damage to the child, or the actual ability of the parents to pay their bills. its a short term solution with lasting repercussions.
Is there any evidence for this dastardly plan, or did you just cook this up, yourself?
Themightytom wrote:and most of all your apparent unfamiliarity with the concept of ego and the role it actually DOES play in education.
Kanastrous wrote:I managed to complete a public-school education plus undergraduate degree without anyone making much effort to cater to my precious ego. Much the opposite, in fact. Am I some kind of special person for having managed this? Of course not. Anyone else ought to be able to do more or less the same.
right because everyone comes from the same situation has access to the same resources etc.
The resources to which one has access have nothing to do with whether or not people cater to your ego. There are middle-class parents who raise their kids with perspective and a sense of proper place and identity. There are poor parents who pump up their kids to believe that their shit smells like roses and they can do no wrong, at all. I've encountered both many times. I suspect that my experience is probably not unique.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
Post Reply