Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

WP: ‘It’s embarrassing to the kids’: Students who owe lunch money will get only a cold jelly sandwich, district says


Cooked Crack

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Why are you nitpicking like I'm clueless when I jus posted an article about the neatherlands food supply methods?  The current means of getting food to people despite their economic situation isnt working, especially in severe poverty situations.  Implementation of food programs by UN and US arent stopping deaths by starvation world over, theres no need for a correction in my understanding here.

 

I just wanted to be clear, and I even pointed out I wasn't sure what you meant by implementation.  Your post seemed like it could be interpreted as we do not generate enough food based on our currently technology and and way our current technology is implemented to feed the world.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a type of marketing technique -- it doesnt really cost that much, and it can go along way.  It also doesnt really solve the problem, which is that the policy must be changed, and whoever wrote that policy or was involved in writing that policy should be immediately fired, and publicly shamed like they tried to  shame those kids, IMO.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Koala said:

This is a type of marketing technique -- it doesnt really cost that much, and it can go along way.  It also doesnt really solve the problem, which is that the policy must be changed, and whoever wrote that policy or was involved in writing that policy should be immediately fired, and publicly shamed like they tried to  shame those kids, IMO.  

 

If you read the piece, they did change the policy.

 

Also if you read the piece, once it became news they collected $14K from parents before Chobani stepped in.   A lot of people that had money to pay for the lunch hadn't been paying and when there was going to be an effect stepped up and paid, which was the objective of the policy.  People not only had enough money to be paying for their kids' lunches, but actually to pay their back bill did so quickly.

 

The policy worked.

4 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Great.  Now the price of my yogurt will go up to offset some poor kids lunch.

 

Doubtful, unless you believe that the Greek yougart market is not really a free market, or demand for Chobani yogurt is going to go up in an equal offsetting manner because of this.

Edited by PeterMP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next headline...

 

Rhode Island school district announces Chobani has exclusive rights to yogurt sales in district....

 

I can tell you...as soon as I saw the article, I remembered my daughters lunch account was getting low, and quickly added to it...

 

The rule was the perfect way to get parents off their ass and pay the stupid bill...as Peter pointed out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we really debating delinquent accounts should be cut off?   If you don't pay your bill you will get no more credit, that's how the world works and there is nothing unfair about that.  

19 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

 

 

I remember that story and the school was so wrong. Then they lied about the reason for the termination, the letter completely contradict the reason they gave later after the outrage. What a gutless bunch.  

Edited by Darrell Green Fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Just now, Kosher Ham said:

As someone without kids....why should my tax dollars go to someone else's children? 

 

There's an argument to be made about contributing to the good of the community I suppose.  My local area is pretty wealthy but the schools are overcrowded, and underfunded as a result, because only a certain amount of the local tax revenue funds them, too many priorities, etc.  There was some special referendum on the ballot a year or two ago about earmarking money for additional school funds, I believe it would have been in the form of a tax on dining out in the area.  It got voted down overwhelmingly for what I'd assume is the above line of thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't they just change the law to keep feeding the kids but send a ticket (similar to a traffic ticket) to the parents?  They could include an informational pamphlet on applying for free lunch and if they qualify, the ticket would be waived.

 

7 minutes ago, Kosher Ham said:

As someone without kids....why should my tax dollars go to someone else's children? 

 

Because we are all affected disproportionately from government spending.  And somewhere along the way the country figured out that feeding poor hungry kids is something the richest country in the world can afford. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Npr’s Ted talk radio hour just released one on simple solutions. I don’t know how to link the specific one from my phone, it’s the latest entry here:

https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510298/ted-radio-hour

 

 

in a segment of it around the middle they covered how the Obama admin tackled some inner city school performance issues by granting them money to feed every child breakfast. 

 

They saw 20% gains in scores. 

 

20%. 

 

Let me repeat that a third time. 20% improvement in scores in an inner city school just because they gave them breakfast. 

 

Lots more there. This is a topic that needs more academics sharing research and less partisan politicians muddying the waters and less general public opining and more general public listening. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kosher Ham said:

As someone without kids....why should my tax dollars go to someone else's children? 

 

Because poverty and extreme need breeds criminal and other negative behavior and a growing population is important for economic growth.

 

If you don't, you'll end up in a country with a high crime rate, paying for incarceration of the people that you wouldn't support as children so you'll end up spending even more money, with a stagnant economy.

4 hours ago, Kosher Ham said:

Yet we can't feed poor hungry veterans, take care of our elderly people, etc. @bearrock

 

Ok, we try to do those things too, and you can argue how well we are doing taking care of children.

 

(and the same logic applied to not giving money to other people's children apply to those groups too (for post-Vietnam veterans) and probably even more so.)

Edited by PeterMP
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

If you don't, you'll end up in a country with a high crime rate, paying for incarceration of the people that you wouldn't support as children so you'll end up spending even more money, with a stagnant economy.

 

When I take the 20% figure from the Ted radio hour, and think about what that means for children starting in kindergarten going through high school graduation and performing 20% better than the last 2 decades of classes of children that went through those school districts... and extrapolate that out to what it means for the economy and society... through their adult hood...

 

socioeconomic opportunity is tied to so many things...  crime (which counts double because if crime goes down not only are we talking about less criminals to deal with, we’re talking about less victims), being a net contributor tax wise, drug use, the prison system (and these people are the most likely to repeat offenders), the health of the neighborhoods (and what that means for future children in those neighborhoods), the police-to-Black-people relationship and the overall issue of racism. 

 

And self worth. How much better does a person in that system feel about themselves? About how society feels about them? And then how we feel about them and treat them? What does that do to economic activity? How does it change their relationships with their neighbors when they’re adults?

 

and we’re just talking about feeding them breakfast

 

i listened to that podcast last night. My mind has been blown since. I realize I listed a lot of optimism in the potential but I don’t think it’s unfounded and I think the potential is so massive even just hitting it 50% would be incredible. 

 

All over cereal, eggs, bacon, pancakes....

 

it just blows my mind. 

Edited by tshile
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...