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.
Aside the fact that Mexican cuisine is the most fat laden, unhealthy of cuisines ... I really don't think it's anyone's business but yours what you choose to eat for breakfast, or any other meal.
Assuming you'd agree with that, I suggest that this same philosophy be extended to others ... including the parents and the children to whom the government wants to mandate what should be served in school for lunch. Is this any different than someone telling you you can't eat enchiladas for breakfast?
As I said before, IF we're going to fund school lunches and breakfast's, I have no problem with the USDA setting standards for the use of our money. IF we're going to spend it anyhow, let's be sure we're getting the most bang for our buck.
Having said that, IF we just give the money to schools as a block grant for feeding kids, I'd also have no trouble trusting the parents and the local school systems to have enough sense to feed their own kids. It would be far less bureaucratic and cheaper in the long run because we wouldn't have all these inspectors running around or staff at the admin building generating required reports. All the feds would need then is a relatively few inspectors to be sure the money is actually being spent on food and not being stolen.
mmm... chorizo & eggs, that's the best breakfast there is!
Yep. Chorizo, eggs, fried taters, refried beans and a warm flour tortilla. Wash it all down with a cold glass of milk or a Shiner Bock and that's breakfast!
Yep. Chorizo, eggs, fried taters, refried beans and a warm flour tortilla. Wash it all down with a cold glass of milk or a Shiner Bock and that's breakfast!
hmm.. I think I know what I'm having for dinner tonight!
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,141,865 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
Ah, but they are not starving. Those 2 meals a day keep them away from death's door don't ya know.
It wasn't until the mid 90's that any school's in our area served breakfast. They didn't serve breakfast in the 60's/70's.. it was lunch. And it was take it or leave it. Didn't kill us then... wouldn't kill em now. Put all the money into making a good healthy fresh lunch. Key words here are good and fresh! It's a parent's responsibility to feed their children, not the taxpayers and not our governments. I'm fine with low-cost lunch's for those in need, and those should be as healthy as possible, but why are we funding breakfast and lunch to begin with? I don't mean to sound cold-hearted but I just think our priorities are so far out of whack... pages and pages about lunch, but zero concern over the biggest issue of all... education itself.
To me, breakfast served in school is just another easy way out for the parents who are too darn lazy to see that their child is fed before being out the door in the morning. It really wasn't that hard to do... just meant getting up about an hour before the kid. And as a mom I was more than happy to do it.. to make sure my family was fed...
I think schools should have good healthy lunches. But... no subsidies. Give lunches back to the lunch ladies who for years and years have fed generations just fine. Common sense menu's to keep our children "thinking" but let's get back to what education should be all about... Educating our children!! When so many kids can't read, do basic arithmetic, make change, balance a checkbook, or any of today's basic skills just to survive then somethings gone terribly wrong. Perhaps it is too much government intervention and perhaps it's time to get back to BASICS and let lunch be just that... lunch.
The school lunch program has long been subsidized by the govt. These lunch ladies (what a derogatory term) you wax rhapsodic about were working under the auspices of the federal government.
It wasn't until the mid 90's that any school's in our area served breakfast. They didn't serve breakfast in the 60's/70's.. it was lunch. And it was take it or leave it. Didn't kill us then... wouldn't kill em now. Put all the money into making a good healthy fresh lunch. Key words here are good and fresh! It's a parent's responsibility to feed their children, not the taxpayers and not our governments. I'm fine with low-cost lunch's for those in need, and those should be as healthy as possible, but why are we funding breakfast and lunch to begin with? I don't mean to sound cold-hearted but I just think our priorities are so far out of whack... pages and pages about lunch, but zero concern over the biggest issue of all... education itself.
To me, breakfast served in school is just another easy way out for the parents who are too darn lazy to see that their child is fed before being out the door in the morning. It really wasn't that hard to do... just meant getting up about an hour before the kid. And as a mom I was more than happy to do it.. to make sure my family was fed...
I was just talking about this with my boyfriend. I only went to one school that had a cafeteria at all, that was my junior high. I don't remember eating much from it because most of the food was gross (even by kids standards) and expensive when my mom or I (I know shocking, a kid can make their own lunches now and then) made my lunch. The high schools I went to didn't have cafeterias but they did have convenience store type places that sold apples, candies, 7-11 style sandwhiches and such. Usually my friends and I went to a local fast food place (Tommy's was my favorite) or brought lunch. And shockingly none of us died of starvation or malnutritian!
I was just talking about this with my boyfriend. I only went to one school that had a cafeteria at all, that was my junior high. I don't remember eating much from it because most of the food was gross (even by kids standards) and expensive when my mom or I (I know shocking, a kid can make their own lunches now and then) made my lunch. The high schools I went to didn't have cafeterias but they did have convenience store type places that sold apples, candies, 7-11 style sandwhiches and such. Usually my friends and I went to a local fast food place (Tommy's was my favorite) or brought lunch. And shockingly none of us died of starvation or malnutritian!
But, that was before the days of the closed campus.
I was just talking about this with my boyfriend. I only went to one school that had a cafeteria at all, that was my junior high. I don't remember eating much from it because most of the food was gross (even by kids standards) and expensive when my mom or I (I know shocking, a kid can make their own lunches now and then) made my lunch. The high schools I went to didn't have cafeterias but they did have convenience store type places that sold apples, candies, 7-11 style sandwhiches and such. Usually my friends and I went to a local fast food place (Tommy's was my favorite) or brought lunch. And shockingly none of us died of starvation or malnutritian!
And to prevent that starvation the government provides food.
Yet we are told our kids have an obesity problem, not a starvation problem.
The logic is lost on me..lost. How can you be starving and obese at the same time ?
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.
