Originally Posted by
Jess
Why have kids if you're gonna have somebody else take care of them? Never understood that.
I am blessed to the point of sending my kids with as much or as little food as they want. I'm sure food banks would love more support to provide for the families of those who aren't as blessed/hard-working as me and my wife. Let private charity do their job; remove charity operations from the public sector - in doing so, you'll reduce my tax burden - allowing me to give MORE to charities - both local and across the nation.
Therein lies the problem: Governments tend to crave money. Governments get their feelings hurt if somebody OTHER than them gets money - which government officials tend to equate (for good reason) with power.
Originally Posted by
Intense
I'm mixed. I've seen from the housing projects around NYC, kids that are not fed at home, if not for School Programs, they would be in trouble, something that would force the hand of Child Services, for better or worse. The Breakfast?Lunch programs are a crutch, that does lead to dependency, true. There is a real problem and it is compound. Another factor to consider in wasted money, is an inventory in how much gets thrown out by the kid's uneaten, untouched. There is allot of waste. One thing is for sure, One size fit's all, centralized planning does not work.
Absolutely right. I'm all for helping the needy - too often our tax dollars get wasted on the 'want-y' - those who simply WANT a free ride; as opposed to those who truly NEED a free ride for awhile.
“… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.