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.
You seem to think that each individual is getting a whooping sum of money with food stamps. Just how much does the government allocate per person for food?
Yes some people eat dinner at 4:30, but the time is immaterial. So why make it a point of emphasis? The school is going to pick a time to serve food and that's the time they choose.
You all are losing this argument that is why instead of dealing with meat of the program you are nibbling at the margins of it or changing the subject.
The basic reality is it makes perfect sense for a school to feed all students who participate in after school programs and who may not have eaten for hours.
This fact is so logical and so rational that there is no controversy. So the focus on the time of the meal which is irrelevant.
I don't care what you did as a teenager in school. This is yet another illogical and irrelevant point.
So schools forever and ever can only function how they functioned while you were in school? What kind of point is that to make? Oh an irrelevant one.
Oh the old lie of self sufficiency and government dependency. Yet another irrelevant point and a distraction.
Here are very simple questions that matter.
Do you think schools should feed students while they are in school?
Hell do you think public schools should exist?
How about Public universities?
Public utilities?
Public roads and highways?
How about social security?
How about the military?
How about the Medicare?
How about a police and fire department?
How about public hospitals?
Here is what I find so fake and phony about these dumb arguments about government dependency, all around us we are dependent on the government in incalculable ways, and people are 1000% ok with that dependency. Hell they don't even see it as dependency and don't even see it when talking about the government.
For some people the ONLY time they see government dependency is when they believe the government is helping people they hate and who they don't want the government to help.
It's only controversial here and perhaps places like right wing talk radio and Fox news. In the real world, most people right or left, wouldn't begrudge a hungry kid food.
of course it's normal. it is also "normal" to eat something during that length of time as well. it is a known fact kids learn more when they have enough food to eat. hunger in america is a big problem, begrudging children a 3 dollar meal seems petty and cheap. if you want america to remain relevant and a top economy you need children who are educated. we spend billions on war, but won't feed our own hungry?
lots of people don't want us to do squat about the girls kidnapped in nigeria, apparently you and others like you don't even want to help children in your own country. pitiful. truly.
yeah... if you consider logic on the level of "if you dare have any issues with this, you must hate the chil-drunn!! " to be perfect, i guess that one really 'sums it up' all right.
What is the objection here, to feeding children or to feeding their parents?
Double-dipping at the taxpayers' expense. They're getting benefits for the same meals twice. Could be contributing to the obesity epidemic among the no/low-income.
No, we're not. We've made a very clear case that taxpayers are paying for the same meals for free school meal kids twice, once in food stamps and then a 2nd time for their free school meals.
This post is so indicative of the shallow, flawed, dishonest, and irrational nature of conservative criticism of government spending in this nation.
It stakes out a thoroughly made up position like "double dipping" that ignores reality in order to suggest that poor people who are the wrong kinds of people are getting over on the right kinds of people with the help of the Democratic party and the government.
The problem is that this isn't policy analysis of the actual program. It is ideology which ignores the reality of the program and is divorced from reality.
The Thrifty Food Plan (TFP), a fundamental part of the U.S. food guidance system and the basis for maximum food stamp allotments
Is based on the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans as well as the 2005 MyPyramid Food Guidance System.
Uses the prices low-income people paid for many foods.
Uses the latest data on food consumption, nutrient content, and food prices: the 2001-
2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and 2001-2002 Food Price
Database.
Offers a more realistic reflection of the time available for food preparation, especially
with increased expectations for work in assistance programs. Hence, it allows more
prepared foods and requires somewhat fewer preparations from scratch.
Now normally, I'd think this explains the error in thinking, but the thinking on this is so clouded by irrationality and hatred, I'll make it simple and plan.
The food stamp program was not constructed in the lab. It is based on the real foods and the real prices for foods that people consume and buy in the real world.
This means that all spending already incorporates school lunches into the program and the program's spending is based on what families actually spend even with the national school lunch programs.
So there is no double dipping because the food stamp program isn't designed in the fantasy way you came up with.
I was in the store today and they'd posted signs saying what WIC will not pay for. This includes herbs and spices. So forget making your food taste decently. They also won't pay for nuts -- which are inexpensive, nutritious and increasingly shown to be helpful in limiting 'bad cholesterol'. White potatoes are also off the list.
Funny how the Right never complains about 'government interference' when it comes to controlling what food the poor eat.
This post is so indicative of the shallow, flawed, dishonest, and irrational nature of conservative criticism of government spending in this nation.
It's not dishonest. Families are getting double benefits for the free meals their kids are getting at school. Their food stamp benefits are not reduced accordingly. Meanwhile, they are the ones who struggle the most with obesity. Think about that...
Quote:
It stakes out a thoroughly made up position like "double dipping" that ignores reality
How does it ignore reality? Explain why you believe so.
The Thrifty Food Plan (TFP), a fundamental part of the U.S. food guidance system and the basis for maximum food stamp allotments
Okay, I'll bite. Where does it explain how nutritional needs are reduced according to how many free meals children receive at school?
Quote:
This means that all spending already incorporates school lunches into the program and the program's spending is based on what families actually spend even with the national school lunch programs.
Cite exactly where it states that.
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.
it is a known fact kids learn more when they have enough food to eat. hunger in america is a big problem, begrudging children a 3 dollar meal seems petty and cheap. if you want america to remain relevant and a top economy you need children who are educated. we spend billions on war, but won't feed our own hungry? 
" to be perfect, i guess that one really 'sums it up' all right.
