Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think the whole lunch subsidy thing is BS anyway, the kids with the subsidy generally just sell the tickets to other kids for a buck so they can buy what they want. Well, it was a buck when I was in school. I see no reason why people can't provide a basic meal for their own child. This is just another example of a program with altruistic intentions that is ultimately ridiculous.
What are you even talking about? What school district uses lunch tickets? Children present their school IDs and their lunch cards to be scanned. There is no "selling" of lunches.
It's a good thing Chris Christie has a huge fat lard ass, it's easier for all these people to kiss it at the same time.
"mwah, mwah, oh christie you are so good at bustin' them commie unions, mwah, mwah, I will gladly let my home value plummet with the quality of schools while continuing to pay exorbitant property taxes as long as you win your pissing match with poor people and unions and teachers, mwah, mwah, let me kiss your fat lard cottage cheese cellulite ass some more, mwah mwah mwah mwah mwah!!!!"
The posts in this thread spouting such anger toward innocent children who come to school without adequate breakfast or lunch or none at all is really sad and those that begrudge these children a meal should be ashamed of themselves. Yes......in a perfect world the parents are responsible and should be sending their children to school with a hot breakfast and lunch. You can't learn very well when your stomach is empty and hurts.
My youngest daughter is a 4th grade teacher in a very low income area in Florida and most of her students receive subsidized breakfasts and lunches. Most of her students come from broken homes....some have either a mom or a dad in jail.....some have both in jail....some live with grandmom because mom and dad took off because they didn't want the responsibilty anymore......some have a mom or dad on crack....or both.....many have a sibling in jail.....some are supposed to be receiving certain medications that mom or dad use to get high or sell.....many have a parent or parents that are unemployed.
These kids already lead tougher lives that most of us have ever experienced, many because their parents are either missing, irresponsible or have financial difficulties and as sad as it may sound some don't have the 10 cents for the oatmeal from ShopRite because mom or dad spend it on crack. Some only have two pair of pants and two shirts that they alternate daily. And....in America, the supposed richest nation on this earth, where Americans are traditionally viewed as a compassionate, giving people most posts on this thread can't find it within themselves to do the right thing where the parents have failed for one reason or another and feed a hungary child. The child doesn't know that its parents are on crack or irresponsible.......they just know they're hungary. I get it that we're tired of paying taxes for the government to spend on $600 toilet seats but do we really want to take out this anger on an innocent hungary child that already carries the weight of problems that we will never know ?
I don't know why others feel virtuous about government seizing money from one citizen and giving it to another citizen that hasn't earned it. That's akin to theft. Shame on those who think that holds virtue. These people that are demonized as 'rich' are often entrepreneurs, small business owners, who are creating products for others who desire them. To think these actions are less virtuous than a government level bureaurcrat legislating punitive tax code, who, in most cases, hasn't done a lick of work in the private sector in his or her lifetime, is naive. Sorry, I'm not buying it.. no sale. I believe in merit. If someone EARNS over 400k a year, and elevates others by offering employment, then I will side with that person every single time. Taxing the rich, and stigmitizing people as 'rich', is harmful. And it's counterproductive.
I don't know why some people think that living in a society under a government that is charged by the Constitution to do what's in the interest oof the people means that the government can or must not collect taxes AND redistribute wealth.
This is not the Wild West, this is not some island where everyone does what they want with no laws or government, and this is not an anarchy. This is a constitutional government, a republic that uses democracy. That means there will be a redistribution of wealth. Period.
You and others can disagree with how much wealth is redistributed or to whom, but nobody can say with any logic that people have "a sense of entitlement" (a hackneyed, overused speaking point from the loony radical-right anarchy Teabagger types) simply because they believe in some form of social welfare. One of the things that makes a society civilized is social welfare, where the people AND government have a sense of responsibility in helping those who need help.
Yes, there are people with a false sense of entitlement, and they are on both sides - the people who feel they are entitled to much more "help" than they truly need, and the people who feel they are entitled to benefit from living in a society that enjoys the benefits of social welfare while not paying into it. But crowing a lame cliche about "the poor have a sense of entitlement" is a crock of crap.
I don't know why others feel virtuous about government seizing money from one citizen and giving it to another citizen that hasn't earned it. That's akin to theft. Shame on those who think that holds virtue. These people that are demonized as 'rich' are often entrepreneurs, small business owners, who are creating products for others who desire them. To think these actions are less virtuous than a government level bureaurcrat legislating punitive tax code, who, in most cases, hasn't done a lick of work in the private sector in his or her lifetime, is naive. Sorry, I'm not buying it.. no sale. I believe in merit. If someone EARNS over 400k a year, and elevates others by offering employment, then I will side with that person every single time. Taxing the rich, and stigmitizing people as 'rich', is harmful. And it's counterproductive.
Oh no, you're totally projecting there. You obviously don't know any rich people! There are many of them, and they make plenty of money with plenty of help from the government. This is the big dirty Republican secret.
I hear you JM.......even shop rite oatmeal to keep it healthy
Exactly. Those kids don't deserve MY money - let their parents buy shoprite oatmeal, they can afford it, it's like 2 cents a day. Just cuz their parents aren't doing it doesn't mean I should. Let the kids starve and have whatever problems they have, that will teach those lazy parents a lesson. It's worth it for a few kids (they're poor, anyway, I mean who cares about them anyway, really? they're not like our better-off kids) to go hungry if it teaches their lazy, irresponsible parents a lesson. Maybe some of them will die and that one less hungry mouth on the welfare, and we get to keep our MONEY that we love SO MUCH!!!
I agree with you - Shoprite - or better yet, WALMART oatmeal, which is like one cent for a week's worth supply, or else their little poor kids can starve and learn their lesson that way. Just PAWS OFF MY MONEY - I need to be able to afford dinner out at Macaroni Grill and 12 bucks for a movie ticket, after all.
I think the whole lunch subsidy thing is BS anyway, the kids with the subsidy generally just sell the tickets to other kids for a buck so they can buy what they want.
Children that are on a subsidized breakfast/lunch program are not given "tickets" !!! Meals are received in a fashion that no one is aware of who receives subsidized meals so they won't be ridiculed by the other children. Isn't that sad that a child would face ridicule from other children for being hungary but after reading some of the angry posts on here I guess it shouldn't surprise me.
can you expand on this statement? poor kids who have parents who WORK and earn minimum wage haven't "earned" anything as opposed to "rich" people? why do I always feel that whenever we have discussions about the working poor it's always synonomous with "welfare queens" - folks who lounge around all day watching soaps and laughing at the "working stiffs". i'll tell you what, there are millions of people who work a HELL of a lot harder than I do who are barely scraping by, as opposed to me who happened to be born when and where I was and into a stable family and blah blah blah. but for the grace of god go i.
did you ever see the bet warren buffet made with the world's top CEO's? prove they paid more percentage wise of their income than their secretaries and he would (do something - I can't remember what)? noone's collected because the tax structure benefits the very wealthy (ok, now I'm really getting off topic, but I think you see where I'm going with this).
Looking back at this, the first sentence you bolded could have been omitted, but I stand by the rest of what I wrote, 100%. I think that's where the rubber really hits the road, what dilineates conservatives, such as myself, from many liberals. At least in the abstract. I will forever maintain that I am way more liberal than what someone who likes to use that label to describe his or her political views is. Ultimately, I believe that one should be able to retain as much of their earnings as possible, and that income is better served by private individuals than seized by government. Government's functions, at least on the federal level, should be limited to military, border security, and the courts. If anyone thinks government officials are more virtuous and 'caring' than individual citizens working in their own best interests, I bellieve their logic is warped. Warren Buffett and the world's top CEOs should be able to keep as much of their money as possible.
Looking back at this, the first sentence you bolded could have been omitted, but I stand by the rest of what I wrote, 100%. I think that's where the rubber really hits the road, what dilineates conservatives, such as myself, from many liberals. At least in the abstract. I will forever maintain that I am way more liberal than what someone who likes to use that label to describe his or her political views is. Ultimately, I believe that one should be able to retain as much of their earnings as possible, and that income is better served by private individuals than seized by government. Government's functions, at least on the federal level, should be limited to military, border security, and the courts. If anyone thinks government officials are more virtuous and 'caring' than individual citizens working in their own best interests, I bellieve their logic is warped. Warren Buffett and the world's top CEOs should be able to keep as much of their money as possible.
Warren Buffet disagrees with you. And he's more credible than you, as he is actually rich and knows what he and his fellow rich-guys pay in taxes. As tahiti pointed out, they pay less than their receptionists, and he does have a challenge out there for anyone to disprove him for a million bucks.
Oh, and according to Warren, it's not the working poor or middle classes that have the sense of entitlement you bemoaned earlier - it's the rich:
"Warren: Well, they say they work hard and that in the process of working hard they make other people money. And-- and that's true of you. That's true of a whole bunch people in the world. But that doesn't entitle them to a preferential tax rate. And the-- and the truth is that their occupation is going to work everyday. Working on the companies they buy, or working on trying to find what securities are cheap."
Last edited by BergenCountyJohnny; 04-29-2010 at 04:17 PM..
so shared sacrifice means yet another attack on schools. Every new thing he comes up with is taking something away from schools yet he still refuses to bring back the tax that expired for those making over $400,000 which coincidentally includes Christie and his wife. Oh, and he's still taking the fully salary as governor. ncie sacrificing there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
