• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Snow days mean less food for many students

Some of the posts in this thread just show ignorant some of you are. Now I am not saying that everyone is poor because of circumstances out of their control but certainly you people know that some people are poor because of circumstances out of their control. Do you think everyone chooses to be poor just like how you think people choose to be gay. Yes, a lot of people are poor because they are lazy, they made bad choices, etc. However, there is a good amount of people who are poor where it's out of their circumstances. For example, I have a friend who is currently poor and has been since childhood. He wasn't able to get a good education because his parents had him skip school to work since they couldn't and their bills needed to be paid. To this day, he is still working, getting little pay, and is responsible for paying his parents skyrocketing medical bills. His debt just keeps increasing but is it his fault? I believe it's his parents fault.
 
I agree that it's just a difference in approach by the two groups. One group feels they have the right to give generously with their own money, and the other feels that they have the right to give generously with other people's money.

That is one way to phrase it and from one perspective that probably seems true. The liberal perspective is that society has a responsibility to itself.
 
Some of the posts in this thread just show ignorant some of you are. Now I am not saying that everyone is poor because of circumstances out of their control but certainly you people know that some people are poor because of circumstances out of their control. Do you think everyone chooses to be poor just like how you think people choose to be gay. Yes, a lot of people are poor because they are lazy, they made bad choices, etc. However, there is a good amount of people who are poor where it's out of their circumstances. For example, I have a friend who is currently poor and has been since childhood. He wasn't able to get a good education because his parents had him skip school to work since they couldn't and their bills needed to be paid. To this day, he is still working, getting little pay, and is responsible for paying his parents skyrocketing medical bills. His debt just keeps increasing but is it his fault? I believe it's his parents fault.

Did your friend choose to have kids before he was prepared to keep them fed? If so, that's all on him.
 
That is one way to phrase it and from one perspective that probably seems true. The liberal perspective is that society has a responsibility to itself.

I understand that. I think that folks should worry about their own responsibilities, and not try to impose responsibilities on everyone else.

My perspective is that feeding your kids is not my responsibility. The idea that you can make it my responsibility simply by garnering enough votes is a barbarous, might-makes-right ideology.

I understand the liberal perspective that everyone has a responsibility to help care for their community and that the majority are justified in compelling those with the means to do so to contribute. I just disagree with it.

You didn't understand the conservative perspective, or at least claimed not to, so hopefully I was able to help.
 
This is great. For once a liberal and a conservative were able to have an exchange on this website without calling one-another a name or something equally silly.

I salute you sir!
 
Did your friend choose to have kids before he was prepared to keep them fed? If so, that's all on him.

He doesn't have any kids. I was responding to the people who implied that everyone who is poor brings it on themselves.
 
He doesn't have any kids. I was responding to the people who implied that everyone who is poor brings it on themselves.

I don't think anyone implied that. I think they implied that parents who don't feed their kids don't deserve to be parents.
 
I don't think anyone implied that. I think they implied that parents who don't feed their kids don't deserve to be parents.

Is it just me or does it not seem pathetic that after the school provides at least 180 meals a years, that these parents can't even meet them half way........:roll:
I'm sorry but, FAIL!.......:doh
 
ramen, mac and cheese, and hotdogs are not exactly the most healthy things to feed kids on a regular basis.
Snow days do not happen on a regular basis.


...they may be fine for college students, but not little kids .

There is such a thing as childrens vitamins, and those can be purchased for around a buck or two a bottle.
 
Is it just me or does it not seem pathetic that after the school provides at least 180 meals a years, that these parents can't even meet them half way........:roll:
I'm sorry but, FAIL!.......:doh

That must be why the kids are so fat these days, and the fact that school buses drop each kid off at his door. With snow days, they will eat less and get more exercise. That should contribute to more healthful living.
 
I guess the Nanny State needs to go home with these people an live their lives for them, because they must be utterly incapable of even feeding their kids, right? The kiddos are missing out on their 'one nutritious meal' of the day (that's laughable, has anyone taken a look at those school lunches lately?) because of they are missing an extra day of school from the snow.

I guess the parents count on the kids eating free lunch at school to keep them in beer money, is that it? Maybe Obama can start a program to keep free lunches going 7 days a week, eh?

Snow days deprive many kids of food - Weather- msnbc.com

There is no way to accurately judge if the people, who use these programs, actually need them.

If I were the ruler of the U.S. I would not let children starve but would assign a DFACs worker to families who continually used government services for a significant period of time.

There should be more requirements to participate in these programs and in home visits to assure the child isn't in any kind of danger.
There is a lot of unreported fraud in anti poverty programs.
 
Last edited:
Yes I grew up under the national school lunch program which is why I took lunch money to school or a sack lunch (because I usually liked that much better.) When the program was first initiated, however, it was a place to dump subsidized agricultural products and otherwise, except for students who honestly could not afford the full fees, was expected to pretty well pay for itself and wasn't any significant budget drain. By the time it became something much more than that, no politician had the guts to challenge the constitutionality of it. Everybody was expected to pay though. The teachers dug in their own pockets to pay for the kid who forgot his lunch or lunch money. The parents invariably felt obligated to reimburse the teacher. The program bypassing parental responsibility came later.

Under the original intent of the Constitution, taxes that confiscate wealth from the productive in order to transfer it to the less productive or nonproductive are indeed theft with regulation written by thieves. Only those taxes used to protect and secure everybody's rights and/or provide the general welfare for everybody are legal under the original intent of the Constitution. Taxes are not 'fees'.

Fees are paid by those who use specific direct services and are intended to pay for those services used. I have no quarrel whatsoever with fees for services.


ronpaulsign.jpg
 
Obviously the source of the overall problem (of the welfare subject) is that there's an adequate supply of support to supplement the necessities.
But there isn't an overwhelming lack of encouragement and support to get them off the system.

In fact - to even suggest that the parents SHOULD focus on getting off the system often gets someone's head chopped off - because heaven forbid anyone ever focus on getting on their own feet and off of welfare and support their children without assistance.

That being said - I find it snide that they took the time to focus on the children who are suddenly without access to supplemental food sources when no one is going anywhere for food, even if they did have money to buy it. As if everyone else's food suddenly materializes out of thin air - just *poof* and the food replicator presents a fully cooked meal or something.

Distribution of foods to all stores has been severed - so the overall chain of supply/obtainment is broken - NOT just those who are poor and didn't have food in the home bought by the state's money.

I think the problem is bigger than *just* the small portion of kids being discussed.
 
Last edited:
Snow days do not happen on a regular basis.




There is such a thing as childrens vitamins, and those can be purchased for around a buck or two a bottle.
you apparently don't know my neighborhood....snow days are a regular occurence:mrgreen: ....and vitamins don't fill up a little kids gut.
 
you apparently don't know my neighborhood....snow days are a regular occurence:mrgreen: ....and vitamins don't fill up a little kids gut.

A pack of ramen fills the child's stomach up and the childrens multi-vitamin makes up for any missed nutrition.
 
Is it just me or does it not seem pathetic that after the school provides at least 180 meals a years, that these parents can't even meet them half way........:roll:
I'm sorry but, FAIL!.......:doh
If they are getting school lunches, doesn't that mean that there are at least foodstamps at home. So why is there no food in the house?
 
If they are getting school lunches, doesn't that mean that there are at least foodstamps at home. So why is there no food in the house?

Truth be told- some states honestly pay **** for foodstamps BECAUSE it's suppose to supplement income - not replace it.

The only way to make sure anyone (poor or otherwise) has food to make it through snow-days is for them to be organized and think ahead of time. You don't have to be rich to stock up food supplies - you have to be organized and thoughtful.
 
You betcha. I will ALWAYS be judgmental about people who neglect and/or abuse their kids. There are public and private social services aplenty for those who do care about their kids, and people who deserve their kids will do whatever they have to do to be sure that they are safe, warm, clothed, fed, and educated. I've devoted a good deal of my life helping disadvantaged families so I am not operating out of a vacuum here. I'm not suggesting that every family will be able to provide more than the basic necessities of life along with love for their kids, but any parent who has kids should be able to do at least that or hand them over to somebody who can and will.

To think that giving the kids school lunches on the 180 days per year that the kids will be in school is enough is ludicrous. The kids deserve the basics on the the other 185 days too.
of course giving them lunches in school is not ENOUGH. walk a mile in their shoes and you just might muster up a little humility.
 
Just how many are there? And further more, how many of these people are in this position due to piss poor life choices? Or does that not matter, the possibility one child might be in a home situation that needs help DEMANDS WE ACT!!! (cue dramatic muzak)

40 percent of kids in my wife's school district are on free and reduced lunches. When the economy was going well virtually none were. That tells me when they could parents were making a living and doing O.K. So much for poor life choices and not wanting to work. Unemployment is 18 percent in my county and close to 20 in the next county.

Some of you people need to get off your high horses and actually go out and see what's going on. Jeeze talk about selfish. :roll:
 
of course giving them lunches in school is not ENOUGH. walk a mile in their shoes and you just might muster up a little humility.

So true.

Anyone remember when some congress critters were dared to live on what people on food stamps do for a few days? They couldn't do it.

Congressional Food Stamp Challenge

It's one thing to condemn the parents but to be so unGodly selfish you could care less about a kid that has no control over the situation is disgusting. And the same people proudly strut around like peacocks that they are against abortion because the unborn child has no control over the situation. Please this is the epitome of hypocrisy. :roll:
 
Just how many are there? And further more, how many of these people are in this position due to piss poor life choices? Or does that not matter, the possibility one child might be in a home situation that needs help DEMANDS WE ACT!!! (cue dramatic muzak)
by all means, let's allow them to go hungry, because YOU need to know why the parents can't feed them.
 
by all means, let's allow them to go hungry, because YOU need to know why the parents can't feed them.

Maybe we will go back to the days when people were scorned for being poor and even for their race. Oh wait we're apparently already there for the former and judging by some some of teaparty idiots we've seen them make a mockery out of the race of our president.

My dad came from a very poor family that made due but didn't wear as nice as clothes as their neighbors. They tried to join the local church but were made fun of and stared at by the parishioners for the second hand homemade clothes they wore. It just amazes me that people like this even bother to attend church as they don't have a clue to what Christ taught.

And no his father was anything but lazy. He would shovel coal out of box cars all by himself for a few bucks or wherever he could get work. Just visualize shoveling out a box car by hand. It just makes my arms hurt to think of it.

Sure there are free loaders out there and always will be, but I'll be damned if I let my neighbor go hungry just because I don't want to share or not even knowing their situation I judge them as lazy.
 
Last edited:
Yeah - taking the food staples away isn't going to fix the problems. That'll just cause a new one.

If people really wanted these children to be properly cared for by parents then they'd actively push for stronger reform of the education and other such systems which are prevention and intervention on this 'I can't care for my child' side of life.

It's impossible, however, to get every single person to be that self sufficient.
We're fortunate enough to live in a time where we HAVE options - especially ones funded BY the government which means they are strongly regulated.
 
Yeah - taking the food staples away isn't going to fix the problems. That'll just cause a new one.

If people really wanted these children to be properly cared for by parents then they'd actively push for stronger reform of the education and other such systems which are prevention and intervention on this 'I can't care for my child' side of life.

It's impossible, however, to get every single person to be that self sufficient.
We're fortunate enough to live in a time where we HAVE options - especially ones funded BY the government which means they are strongly regulated.


And furthermore how well does a child learn, listen, or behave on an empty stomach? You can pay now or later...
 
And furthermore how well does a child learn, listen, or behave on an empty stomach? You can pay now or later...

Exactly.

If Mom and Dad aren't quite together yet it doesn't mean they don't want to be, won't be in the future, or shouldn't be given the chance to work towards it.
 
Back
Top Bottom