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 guess I could understand it not being part of the regular lunch. However, why couldn't they offer it as an additional item - purchased above and beyond regular lunch? I know they did this at my daughter's high school. They had regular lunch but if you wanted and had the funds, you could purchase different foods and/or snacks.
Absolutely. Seven-year-olds should be held responsible for their actions in the cafeteria. If they give themselves diabetes, they deserve it! Let them serve as an example for other kids to learn from.
Signed,
A Typical American Crank
Palin/Nugent 2016!
LoL, you are taking the position of attacking your straw-man again. The kids parents should be responsible until the are 18. Like every decision they make as a minor.
Palin is a lunatic and Ted is a closet child rapist that **** himself for a week to avoid service. That is a non-sequoitor that you know nothing about. Get help because you are the only person that brought them up. You call me a crank?
Sorry, but if a kids parents should bear full responsibility for paying for the kid then that's what they should do.
LoL, you are taking the position of attacking your straw-man again. The kids parents should be responsible until the are 18. Like every decision they make as a minor.
Palin is a lunatic and Ted is a closet child rapist that **** himself for a week to avoid service. That is a non-sequoitor that you know nothing about. Get help.
Sorry, but if a kids parents should bear full responsibility for paying for the kid then that's what they should do.
You're making the argument that since medical care is tax payer funded, then the feds should be able to control what people eat. Essentially, this will extend to everyone, not just kids in school. Are you sure you're okay with that?
You're making the argument that since medical care is tax payer funded, then the feds should be able to control what people eat. Essentially, this will extend to everyone, not just kids in school. Are you sure you're okay with that?
Ah, the slippery slope of universal health care. Back to the pink cookie.
You're making the argument that since medical care is tax payer funded, then the feds should be able to control what people eat. Essentially, this will extend to everyone, not just kids in school. Are you sure you're okay with that?
We'd the first country in the world to do that, then. When I went to the UK and Germany, still saw my share of fatties walking around, and they weren't Americans. Lot of greasy, deep fried fish and chips in the UK as well. So...uh....slippery slope fail, big time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel
Ah, the slippery slope of universal health care. Back to the pink cookie.
He's making an irrelevant argument. The same, stupid arguments the neo-Confederates of the 20th century made for Social Security and Medicare. It's time we stop listening to right-wing kookery
You're making the argument that since medical care is tax payer funded, then the feds should be able to control what people eat. Essentially, this will extend to everyone, not just kids in school. Are you sure you're okay with that?
If we as a tax payer pay for that do we get a say on peoples behavior or not?
If we don't...then the drug testing for welfare recipients (frankly if anyone gets public money it is fair to test IMHO) is moot. If we do than those who get subsidies for the ACA can do what they want. It's mutually exclusive. You can't have both so please choose. Personally health care gets paid and we pay to reduce costs so the ED is not used as a PCP personally. I am just 1 person out of 299,999,999+ though so I am just stating my opinion as the first amendment allows.
He's making an irrelevant argument. The same, stupid arguments the neo-Confederates of the 20th century made for Social Security and Medicare. It's time we stop listening to right-wing kookery
I'm most definitely conservative so I'm not sure you will find me to be on your side in this regard. I think, when it comes to Americans, they wouldn't be able to help themselves in trying to dictate what people eat or do not eat if we had universal health care. Maybe we're just too bossy - who knows?
However, I do think we should get back to the pink cookie because I'm still curious why the school wouldn't be allowed to sell it above and beyond regular lunch.
If we as a tax payer pay for that do we get a say on peoples behavior or not?
If we don't...then the drug testing for welfare recipients (frankly if anyone gets public money it is fair to test IMHO) is moot. If we do than those who get subsidies for the ACA can do what they want. It's mutually exclusive. You can't have both so please choose. Personally health care gets paid and we pay to reduce costs so the ED is not used as a PCP personally. I am just 1 person out of 299,999,999+ though so I am just stating my opinion as the first amendment allows.
Let's not forget, as well, that private insurance companies pre-ACA also "penalized" their customers if their BMI was too high, if they used tobacco, etc. What's the difference now? They're crying over spilled milk
Let's not forget, as well, that private insurance companies pre-ACA also "penalized" their customers if their BMI was too high, if they used tobacco, etc. What's the difference now? They're crying over spilled milk
Not all of them did and the free market gave you the option to shop based on that criteria, if that was important to you.
But seriously, I do want to know my answer about this flipping pink cookie!
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.