• 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

liblady said:
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.
Click to expand...

185 days without lunch sounds like child abuse to me. Where's the state's division of youth in this and why aren't these kids being taken away from their parents and being put in homes where they can get 3 meals a day again?
 
Ockham said:
185 days without lunch sounds like child abuse to me. Where's the state's division of youth in this and why aren't these kids being taken away from their parents and being put in homes where they can get 3 meals a day again?
Click to expand...

Two words: Overwhelmed and underfunded because it's not as much a priority as fighting wars in bum f**k Egypt or bailing out Wall Street.
 
Ockham said:
185 days without lunch sounds like child abuse to me. Where's the state's division of youth in this and why aren't these kids being taken away from their parents and being put in homes where they can get 3 meals a day again?
Click to expand...

The article did not say they were not getting feed, it did say the only "nutritious " meal of the day.

Someone mentioned the price of Mac & Cheese and Raman. The sodium content alone should scare people away from that. Not to mention very little if any nutritional value for a growing child.

The problem here is not about a lack of food, but nutritional food. I know from experiance nutrtious food is freaking exspencive.

My doctor put me on the South Beach Diet. Before that diet we spent about $400.00 a month to feed ourselves. After the diet started or food budget ballooned to almost double. I can't even imagine in this economy and being poor trying to feed a child a healthy diet.

More is at play here than just irresponsible parents.
 
EnigmaO01 said:
Two words: Overwhelmed and underfunded because it's not as much a priority as fighting wars in bum f**k Egypt or bailing out Wall Street.
Click to expand...

Well, we're talking about State funding here, not Federal funding. States do not directly fund the U.S. military so I'll disagree to your reasoning of "foreign wars". States are not funded by the Federal Government for DYFS, that's part of the States responsibility, so if they are overworked and underfunded - the reason is not because of foreign wars but because of State prioritization of funds or lack thereof.

But I agree they ARE overworked and under funded at the State level. So why is that and what are we the people going to do about it? My view is to actually CUT lunch, food stamp and welfare services --- take some of that money and put it towards DYFS at the State levels or allow any federal funding of welfare programs to be used by the States as they see fit. Not cut entirely but put caps on the length of time and put oversight on them to curb abuse. Family's who live off the government must be motivated to become part of society and not a parasite living off the government host.
 
Blackdog said:
The article did not say they were not getting feed, it did say the only "nutritious " meal of the day.
Click to expand...
We then need to understand what constitutes "nutritious". And what if children are getting 0 "nutritious" meals but eat anyway, does that constitute abuse or at best parental negligence? I think so..

Is McDonalds happy meals "nutritious"? How about a piece of cake? A snickers bar?

Blackdog said:
More is at play here than just irresponsible parents.
Click to expand...
Parents are the majority of what is at play here. Children are a responsibility of the parent not the State or state entity / government. If a child cannot get a "nutritious" meal without State funded programs, then the Children need to be moved to a family where they can be fed properly, and the parents can gain time to work out their issues so they can again in some future time, take back their parental responsibility.
 
Ockham said:
We then need to understand what constitutes "nutritious". And what if children are getting 0 "nutritious" meals but eat anyway, does that constitute abuse or at best parental negligence? I think so..
Click to expand...

Only an idiot does not know the difference between nutritious and junk.

Ockham said:
Is McDonalds happy meals "nutritious"? How about a piece of cake? A snickers bar?
Click to expand...

:roll:

Ockham said:
Parents are the majority of what is at play here. Children are a responsibility of the parent not the State or state entity / government. If a child cannot get a "nutritious" meal without State funded programs, then the Children need to be moved to a family where they can be fed properly, and the parents can gain time to work out their issues so they can again in some future time, take back their parental responsibility.
Click to expand...

OK I guess my argument went right over your head. Poor people trying to provide for the children, who are making an effort should not lose them because they need a little help.
 
Hatuey said:
You do know there are poor people in this country right? People who have to chose between $5 of gas to drive to work and $5 to buy something to eat for their kids?
Click to expand...

Sell the car and cancel the insurance. Problem solved.
 
randel said:
you apparently don't know my neighborhood....snow days are a regular occurence:mrgreen: ....and vitamins don't fill up a little kids gut.
Click to expand...

All the more reason to be at least a little prepared.........:roll:
 
randel said:
you apparently don't know my neighborhood....snow days are a regular occurence:mrgreen: ....and vitamins don't fill up a little kids gut.
Click to expand...

How do they get fed in the summertime?
 
apdst said:
Sell the car and cancel the insurance. Problem solved.
Click to expand...

Yeah for about a month. And then who solves the problem of mom not having money next month because she cant get to work?

You guys act like the answer is so simple. "Oh well...derrrrrr...just stop being poor."

It's asinine fantasy approach to a real problem.
 
Blackdog said:
Only an idiot does not know the difference between nutritious and junk.
Click to expand...

And only and ignorant ass assumes a definition of a term used generically, hence you didn't answer my question or provide the definition.


Blackdog said:
OK I guess my argument went right over your head. Poor people trying to provide for the children, who are making an effort should not lose them because they need a little help.
Click to expand...

Are you the spokesperson for all poor people? No. You're the spokesperson for you. You're argument is so generalized as to be meaningless. Some poor people live off the system and some work hard. Differentiating the two and helping those who work to make things better, and cutting off the parasites is the issue.

Perhaps you should stop attempting to be snarky and address the problems with potential solutions.
 
Ockham said:
And only and ignorant ass assumes a definition of a term used generically, hence you didn't answer my question or provide the definition.




Are you the spokesperson for all poor people? No. You're the spokesperson for you. You're argument is so generalized as to be meaningless. Some poor people live off the system and some work hard. Differentiating the two and helping those who work to make things better, and cutting off the parasites is the issue.

Perhaps you should stop attempting to be snarky and address the problems with potential solutions.
Click to expand...

Oh I get it now. You're just a troll.
 
Ockham said:
And only and ignorant ass assumes a definition of a term used generically, hence you didn't answer my question or provide the definition.




Are you the spokesperson for all poor people? No. You're the spokesperson for you. You're argument is so generalized as to be meaningless. Some poor people live off the system and some work hard. Differentiating the two and helping those who work to make things better, and cutting off the parasites is the issue.

Perhaps you should stop attempting to be snarky and address the problems with potential solutions.
Click to expand...


You haven't offered a solution. Just generalizations. "We need to help those who really need it and get rid of the abusers!"

Ok. How?
 
Deuce said:
You haven't offered a solution. Just generalizations. "We need to help those who really need it and get rid of the abusers!"

Ok. How?
Click to expand...

Re-read post #104 and #105.

If you want a diagram, I'll work on that.
 
Deuce said:
You haven't offered a solution. Just generalizations. "We need to help those who really need it and get rid of the abusers!"

Ok. How?
Click to expand...

One thing I think should happen is mandatory drug screening for anyone on public assistance.
 
jallman said:
Yeah for about a month. And then who solves the problem of mom not having money next month because she cant get to work?

You guys act like the answer is so simple. "Oh well...derrrrrr...just stop being poor."

It's asinine fantasy approach to a real problem.
Click to expand...

Well, I think there are people who are poor, because of the choices they made. Not all of them, but some.

So, yeah, in alot of cases the answer is, "just stop being poor".
 
jallman said:
One thing I think should happen is mandatory drug screening for anyone on public assistance.
Click to expand...

How the hell does that help children who are not getting "nutritious" (whatever that definition means) meals?
 
apdst said:
Well, I think there are people who are poor, because of the choices they made. Not all of them, but some.

So, yeah, in alot of cases the answer is, "just stop being poor".
Click to expand...

That's not even close to an accurate assessment of the issue. "In a lot of cases" does not give any quantifying data to work with. It's too general. Also, what constitutes a "bad decision"? Got anything more than subjectivity?
 
Ockham said:
How the hell does that help children who are not getting "nutritious" (whatever that definition means) meals?
Click to expand...

Having trouble following a conversation?

He asked about separating abusers of the system from people who really need the help. Do try to keep up next time.
 
jallman said:
That's not even close to an accurate assessment of the issue. "In a lot of cases" does not give any quantifying data to work with. It's too general. Also, what constitutes a "bad decision"? Got anything more than subjectivity?
Click to expand...

Maybe he'll define his subjectivity if you can define "nutritious". :roll:
 
jallman said:
Having trouble following a conversation?

He asked about separating abusers of the system from people who really need the help. Do try to keep up next time.
Click to expand...

Stop changing the subject and answer the question tough guy. I offered solutions, you ignore them. I ask for a defitiion, you accuse me of not keeping up. You're the troll pal, not me.

I'll respond when you can put something that's above a 3rd grade level - until then, have a nice day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom