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.
Darned few potatoes are grown in Kansas outside a few family gardens and most all the corn that is grown is for livestock feed and ethanol so eating it would be both prohibitive and not very good eating.
Buy your own damn food? Most of the kids in this part of the world do exactly that although there are a few who get the free and reduced prices. The problem is that what is provided is pretty short in amount and kids just aren't used to being forced to get by on why they get at lunch.
Have you ever thought that there is a chance that what brentwood girl said about calories has something to do with what kids need to supply them for the day. Her kid has to get on his bus at 6:25 and that would make eating a very big breakfast a real load. I don't think that leaners, either in DC or here at C-D really understand that one size fits all is pretty stupid reasoning. I doubt that many 120 lb 9th graders need as much as a 200 lb. 9th grader does, but they get the same servings at that place.
Bunch of freeloaders in Kansas. Our schools have supplied school lunches, paid for by the parents, since in the 1940s sometime and you say something like that. Of course, you leaners refuse to understand that since schools do still get excess food from the government it comes with their rules about how much the kids can eat at school. You people try so hard and don't get anything done except among other leaners.
Have you ever explained what a leaner is? You keep using this word, it almost seems as if you want it to be a pejorative taking into account the context of your posts. Will you ever explain what you believe a leaner is? Or should we all just start referring to you as a fatter?
I will admit to not watching the new video since I found out that the previous one was written by a teacher.
The ruckus did cause me to look at school lunch programs. First off, my children took their own lunches from home because I considered school lunches to be heavy on fried, salt and sugar. Pizza, fish sticks and tater tots are not my idea of a good lunch.
The schools are provided guidelines. The school district nutritionist planned the menus. If food was being tossed, talk to your school administration.
Every federal program that I am aware of has a process where folks can chime in. Only an idiot would think a 2nd. grader and a high school football player required the same lunch. The school districts could have been letting the department of agriculture know the guidelines were faulty, rather than blindly following them. Any school nutritionists who went along with this nonsense instead of picking up the phone and asking if a mistake had been made or are y'all just crazy, is as guilty as Washington.
In every article I have read about these school lunch grousing fests, they always point out the huge volume of food going into the trash. It is usually the fruits and vegetables. The school where "some" sack lunches were banned, the kids were eating a bag of flaming cheetos washed down with a coke for lunch, that is what precipitated the draconian measure of banning most lunches from home. The school stated that they allowed lunch from home to follow any special diet requirements, so I guess the ban really only applies to the parents who were sending their kids to school with a sack of chips and soda. Not very conducive to learning, I might add.
I think this is more about kids refusing to eat the food they are being served. When my son attended HS, the kids were given options. If he felt like having a burger, he could. If he wanted to have a grilled chicken breast served over mixed greens. No one was forced to eat only one thing.
My son is 6' 3". The school lunch was all he ate in HS. When he came home, he fixed himself a snack before dinner. I understand your daughter being hungry at 4:00 - aren't all teens hungry all afternoon, regardless? I think this school lunch thing is much ado about nothing.
My daughter has a choice, so it doesn't go to waste. It is the portion size that remains the same, for a 1st grader as it is for a 9th grader. Same cost, too. $2.75 is what my cost is for my daughters lunch, daily. Cost is great, but they do get what they pay for and no seconds.
Theres an Obesity crisis in Kansas and most of the Country except the Northeast...so we shouldn't be listening to the Kansas kids...
That map seems to be designed to skew your opinion based on colors rather than the numbers, considering the lowest range goes up to 26.2% and every other darker color is only an extra 1.5% higher, which really makes the map look drastic, when in reality most of the country (sans the South) is separated by only about 3%.
It seems that another small western Kansas school has a very enterprising bunch of kids who have come up with a new video against the new feeding rules from Washington, DC. This may be the best one I have seen although obviously done by amateurs.
You can read what my Congressman thinks about some very serious problems and then you can see why I am very sorry that I live in a part of Kansas that has been moved over to a different voting district. If you don't like things like that go ahead and scroll down to where you can see the video.
Pretty sure the parents do pay for their lunch. Only the welfare kids get free lunch.
The program is still subsidized, even if a parent pays "full price" for the lunch, that "full price" (much like college tuition) is lower because the government has contributed funds.
Funny, of course, that anyone talks about SOCIALISM when dealing with PUBLIC SCHOOLS - perhaps the biggest socialist program we have in America. Have any conservative parents even SEEN what a private school education costs, per child? Compare to what you pay in property taxes, then come back whining about SOCIALISM!
Childless people, old people, etc. have to pay into a system to educate kids they don't have, and may never have. Talk about a socialist racket!
I remember carrying a ham and cheese and a thermos bottle of milk to school when I was in the first grade in 1952. I am still carrying a ham and cheese sandwich to work for lunch in 2012. Some things never change.
I also remember having hot lunches available in High School. Mystery meat (meat loaf), potatoes and some twice boiled beans was one of the better examples. Another fine treat was pasta with tomato sauce and Kraft “parmesan” cheese. That stuff put me off parmesan cheese for decades until I actually tasted some of the real thing.
Most school cooks try to provide a decent lunch but are simply unable to do so given the budgets they have. It is not a job I would ever want to do.
The program is still subsidized, even if a parent pays "full price" for the lunch, that "full price" (much like college tuition) is lower because the government has contributed funds.
Funny, of course, that anyone talks about SOCIALISM when dealing with PUBLIC SCHOOLS - perhaps the biggest socialist program we have in America. Have any conservative parents even SEEN what a private school education costs, per child? Compare to what you pay in property taxes, then come back whining about SOCIALISM!
Childless people, old people, etc. have to pay into a system to educate kids they don't have, and may never have. Talk about a socialist racket!
Another failing government program that is under funded?
Make the cost support the program and you may see more sack lunches sent from home and less cost to the districts, who are trying like hell to become the parents of our kids.
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.