Real food - is that too much to ask?

[ConHog]

Our district takes preschoolers to their dental appointments. What you need to see, Con, is that there is no end to where the nanny state will go, on our dime.

Meals, that's all we're discussing in THIS thread. Start a thread on schools taking any children to dental appointments and I'll join you in disagreeing with that.

Oh a couple comments were made earlier to that I want to address.

Yes, families SHOULD use SNAP to buy lunch for their kids if they are receiving that, but not every family that is receiving reduced priced or free lunches at school is on SNAP.

I got an idea, let's make poor kids wear signs that say "poor" on them, that was they are easier for the bullies to identify. I'm sure that more ass whippings and being made fun of will make sure they are not sucking up welfare.

[Intense]

Great TEDx video regarding cleaning up the food industry.

http://www.wimp.com/realfood/

Watch that -then dig up youtubes for Food, Inc.

Now - after watching those, think about our Government shutting down Amish farms and other raw, real food establishments. When I close my mind I envision a nation where the Government raises our kids after birth, controls/demands our diets, and removes any form of resistance 'for our own good/safety'.

Great Presentation. Well prepared. Yeah, Genetic Engineering of our food supply without testing, and Government compliance, running cover, for unethical practices is very disturbing. Just more confirmation on where even the EPA's interests really lie, in supporting this crime, while busting the chops of anything going Organic.

The Unhealthy Truth:
How Our Food Is Making Us Sick and What We Can Do About It

In a first-person story as shocking as it is inspirational, The Unhealthy Truth published in May 2009 by Random House, reveals the alarming relationship between the manipulation of our food and both the increase in dangerous allergies in our children as well as the increase in cancers in our families—and offers a road map to healthy living.

Robyn O’Brien is an unlikely candidate for a crusade. A Houston native from a conservative family, this MBA and married mother of four was not someone who gave much thought to what went on inside government agencies or about the additives and chemicals in our food. Until the day her youngest daughter had a violent allergic reaction to eggs, and everything changed. 

From Your Link.

http://www.robynobrien.com/books.html

[fj1200]

Why do some of you act like being conservative means being the biggest , meanest dicks you can possibly be?

Condescension is preferred then? How about this; announce that you will no longer be providing breakfast or lunch at school at the beginning of next school year and then find out who shows up at school hungry. Once the actual need is identified inform DFACS that Johnny's family needs a little help in providing proper sustenance.

I got an idea, let's make poor kids wear signs that say "poor" on them, that was they are easier for the bullies to identify. I'm sure that more ass whippings and being made fun of will make sure they are not sucking up welfare.

I'm pretty sure that the state sponsored karate lessons that you're school district will provide will allay those issues.

[ConHog]

Condescension is preferred then? How about this; announce that you will no longer be providing breakfast or lunch at school at the beginning of next school year and then find out who shows up at school hungry. Once the actual need is identified inform DFACS that Johnny's family needs a little help in providing proper sustenance.



I'm pretty sure that the state sponsored karate lessons that you're school district will provide will allay those issues.

so you propose that rather than spending a few dollars to feed some kids that we now start sicking the government on families who maybe aren't feeding their children?

Sounds like government get out of my life to me.

[fj1200]

so you propose that rather than spending a few dollars to feed some kids that we now start sicking the government on families who maybe aren't feeding their children?

Sounds like government get out of my life to me.

The government is already there. I just want the particular government agency to do what they were created to do. Educators to educate and welfare providers to provide welfare.

That doesn't sound crazy does it?

[logroller]

I summarized your 'argument'.

Your argument speaks to my comment: You don't like how you feel if a kid feels hungry. Thus, it's the responsibility of the entire population to keep that from happening.

Then, you went on to make wild claims and broad statements of "fact" without basis in data. I left those alone.

His argument is a school's role is to provide the best learning environment they can; if hungry kids inhibit this, feed them. Its really pretty simple.
Your argument is, summarily, 'not my f'ing problem'... indeed, its the school's-- so butt out.
So far as broad statements without data-- do you recall saying

.. Do not use statistics. ..

So unless you misspoke, and meant, rather, you did not use statistics; as in, he failed to, then you defined the rules of argument.

Lighten up Francis. My actual concern is not kids having a good meal, but people justifying the roll of schools (government) based on their perception of bad parents. Whose standard of parenting is used? How far will people go in justifying the roll of government in kids lives.

My kids qualify for reduced lunches; on the paperwork there was no parenting questions-- purely fiscal. The problem I see is when schools offer healthy foods, it mostly goes uneaten-- especially among lower income schools. This is a problem because the reasoning behind feeding the kids, obviously, if for them to eat. So, regardless of how well-intentioned subsidized lunch and eating standards may be, they don't accomplish the laws' prescribed role of, respectfully, kids eating and eating healthy. SO, which standard is to be sacrificed? The healthier meal goes uneaten, so feed em crap-- at least they're fed. This demonstrates the inefficacy of institutions. I believe there is good reason the founders didn't enumerate education as a federal power, not because it wasn't considered valuable, but because they knew it would be best managed on a more local basis. Additionally, it can be examined in a cafeteria full of 200 kids, there's maybe two or three adults there and the kids just do what they want. If I might offer some anecdotal evidence, my wife brings in healthy food once a month and feeds the kids herself-- and more eat it than don't. Acting in small groups is the best way to engage people, and certainly children. Of course, teachers and their unions don't like the idea of teachers having to teach kids how to eat healthy and monitor their behavior...which I happen to think is the best solution.(perhaps the only one)

[ConHog]

The government is already there. I just want the particular government agency to do what they were created to do. Educators to educate and welfare providers to provide welfare.

That doesn't sound crazy does it?

What freakin difference does it make? Except that with the school providing the meals, we KNOW the meal makes it to the student at school. As stated , pretty good evidence that SNAP benefits aren't being used to send meals to school.

[pegwinn]

It's a wonderful Catch 22. We demand schools serve healthy meals. Trouble is, schools feeds hundreds (and thousands) with limited resources. And unlimited input from those who don't often bother at home.

What I find interesting is that the same people who protest unhealthy food often take their kids out to McDonalds or Taco Bell. Which are about as far from "healthy" as you can get.

I have a Taco Bell jones like no ones business. Fallbrook HS, where my son attended, actually has a no-shit Taco Bell on campus.

What I find interesting is the same people who claim to be in the education field are woefully inept and ignorant of ideas concerning policies, lessons, and plans that are good, true, and right.

My oldest kid is a high school sciences teacher (Bio, Chem, Physics). School policy is driven by politics which is driven by yada blah etc. It boils down to the "one guy rule". One hundred Marines can storm bar street in (fill in the blank with foriegn liberty port here) and it only takes one fuck up to get the innocent 99 confined to ship/base/camp.

One parent who fucks up draws the attention of 'society' that means well and is able to fuck up by the numbers. But, since that one parent cannot seem to be a parent, the other 99 kids "benifit" from societal interventions trying to prevent the "one guy rule" from happening.

I don't have an answer. If the federal .gov steps in it is constitutionally wrong. If we allow malnourished kids to starve it is morally wrong.

[fj1200]

What freakin difference does it make? Except that with the school providing the meals, we KNOW the meal makes it to the student at school. As stated , pretty good evidence that SNAP benefits aren't being used to send meals to school.

And why would they be? You'll give them breakfast/lunch.

One parent who fucks up draws the attention of 'society' that means well and is able to fuck up by the numbers. But, since that one parent cannot seem to be a parent, the other 99 kids "benifit" from societal interventions trying to prevent the "one guy rule" from happening.

And there in lies the problem. Instead of a policy to address the 1, we get policies that address 100.

[DragonStryk72]

You were in HS 93-97? *Ahem* 74-77?

And way to blame overcooked Navy food on health.

lol, it's in the god damned manuals! Like, if you look at the listed cook times and such, they're all set about 5-15 minutes longer than they should be.

[SassyLady]

I was one of those kids who got "free" lunches, but we had to work on the cafeteria line as an exchange. I had to hand out milk so everyone in school knew I was getting a free lunch. So, the whole concept of bullies picking on the poor kids is not new.

[darin]

His argument is a school's role is to provide the best learning environment they can; if hungry kids inhibit this, feed them. Its really pretty simple.
Your argument is, summarily, 'not my f'ing problem'... indeed, its the school's-- so butt out.
So far as broad statements without data-- do you recall saying

And my argument is: He cannot define the terms I listed. Unless we agree upon what 'best' or 'better' means, it's just folks reciting feel good "reasons" why they think my tax dollars should be spent on feeding kids who otherwise have parents able to feed them.

So unless you misspoke, and meant, rather, you did not use statistics; as in, he failed to, then you defined the rules of argument.

No. I'm saying if he wants to 'earn' or make a valid point, throwing up out-of-context, biased, or otherwise slanted statistics is a waste of time. I'm saying - am trying to be as clear as possible here - Without context, definitions, source-questions/data, using mere or made-up statistics is NOT proving a point.

So - again...trying to be clear, so stay with me...If CH or anyone wants to claim school lunches are of benefit to society in a tangible or even meaningful way, some of the guidelines I presented must be met.

[Abbey Marie]

Meals, that's all we're discussing in THIS thread. Start a thread on schools taking any children to dental appointments and I'll join you in disagreeing with that.

Oh a couple comments were made earlier to that I want to address.

Yes, families SHOULD use SNAP to buy lunch for their kids if they are receiving that, but not every family that is receiving reduced priced or free lunches at school is on SNAP.

I got an idea, let's make poor kids wear signs that say "poor" on them, that was they are easier for the bullies to identify. I'm sure that more ass whippings and being made fun of will make sure they are not sucking up welfare.

No, we are discussing how schools are doing things some of us feel they shouldn't, and I have taken the time to show you how that ends up going places that I guess even you don't like.

I don't need anyone to tell me what I can or cannot post in a particular thread. I'm a grown up, and an intelligent one, and I am quite able to discern what a thread is about.

[ConHog]

No, we are discussing how schools are doing things some of us feel they shouldn't, and I have taken the time to show you how that ends up going places that I guess even you don't like.

I don't need anyone to tell me what I can or cannot post in a particular thread. I'm a grown up, and an intelligent one, and I am quite able to discern what a thread is about.

Stop, this is like the third time this week you've accused me of somehow trying to tell you what you can or can not post in a thread, and you know that simply isn't the case. You may not like my debate style, but you absolutely should know by know that I don't tell anyone who should post or who shouldn't or what they should say when they do.

[darin]

You shouldn't say that, CH...

:P