Why Do We Even Have Free School Lunch Programs?

[Knight Templar]

the easy answer is to provide good, well balanced meals to students from poor families.

But school lunch programs in the United States actually IIRC, were started mainly as a means of propping up farmers who had raised crop surpluses.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_lunch_program

so why keep a govt. handout like this for farmers?

aren't American kids in more danger of obesity than malnutrition?

 

[Kemaiku]

 

[Knight Templar]

That is not an answer.

 

[Finn]

aren't American kids in more danger of obesity than malnutrition?

You can be obese and malnutritioned at the same time.

I've worked with inner-city kids. Lot of them don't get to eat breakfast. Their parents can't afford to pay for school lunches.

 

[auntiehill]

I don't care WHY they were started; I only care that they provide children a decent meal that they might otherwise have to go without. According to WorldHunger.Org, about one in 7 Americans are "food insecure," meaning they often go hungry and don't know where their next meal is coming from. Kids can't learn if they're hungry. Free lunches might be, for some, the only food source they can count on.

And I'm fairly certain you posted this thread, not because you believe anything you've written, but because you merely want to stir the pot, rile people up and draw attention to yourself.

Please stop; it's annoying.

 

[Knight Templar]

I don't care WHY they were started; I only care that they provide children a decent meal that they might otherwise have to go without. According to WorldHunger.Org, about one in 7 Americans are "food insecure," meaning they often go hungry and don't know where their next meal is coming from. Kids can't learn if they're hungry. Free lunches might be, for some, the only food source they can count on.

And I'm fairly certain you posted this thread, not because you believe anything you've written, but because you merely want to stir the pot, rile people up and draw attention to yourself.

Please stop; it's annoying.

So. I can't believe in things that are controversial and post my opinion on them in a forum where idiotic flaming and thread derailment is not allowed?

You want serious discussion or not.

 

[trekmom]

I don't care WHY they were started; I only care that they provide children a decent meal that they might otherwise have to go without. According to WorldHunger.Org, about one in 7 Americans are "food insecure," meaning they often go hungry and don't know where their next meal is coming from. Kids can't learn if they're hungry. Free lunches might be, for some, the only food source they can count on.

And I'm fairly certain you posted this thread, not because you believe anything you've written, but because you merely want to stir the pot, rile people up and draw attention to yourself.

Please stop; it's annoying.

So. I can't believe in things that are controversial and post my opinion on them in a forum where idiotic flaming and thread derailment is not allowed?

You want serious discussion or not.

I wasn't aware of any controversial aspect of the school lunch program, except maybe that they need to offer more healthy options. Also, I think things like "Salisbury Steak" go to waste more often than not. In a perfect world, kids would have a buffet with fresh fruits and veggies, sandwich fixings, and one or 2 hot options that vary, like chicken or pizza. Then have the "rules" be one of each food group, instead of "choose 3"

 

[Alidar Jarok]

the easy answer is to provide good, well balanced meals to students from poor families.

This is the answer. Regardless of the reasons it started, it's obviously not exclusively for this anymore.

Besides, what do you have against the children of farmers?

aren't American kids in more danger of obesity than malnutrition?

Obesity is, more often than not, caused by unhealthy food, not too much food. Starving kids at school doesn't solve the obesity problem.

In addition, there are pedagogical reasons for lunches since hungry students are ineffective students.

 

[sonak]

the easy answer is to provide good, well balanced meals to students from poor families.

This is the answer. Regardless of the reasons it started, it's obviously not exclusively for this anymore.

Besides, what do you have against the children of farmers?

aren't American kids in more danger of obesity than malnutrition?

Obesity is, more often than not, caused by unhealthy food, not too much food. Starving kids at school doesn't solve the obesity problem.

In addition, there are pedagogical reasons for lunches since hungry students are ineffective students.

yep, your last point is a great one. Even leaving aside the ethics of it, it's self-defeating for schools to try to teach kids that are more focused on their empty stomachs than the subject matter.

 

[Whoa Nellie]

As a parent of a student athlete, I see the current administration's 'Nanny State' idea of a one size fits all nutritional program for this nation's school kids as completely absurd. The most stinging indictment of this idea comes from the kids themselves.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IB7NDUSBOo


This is brilliantly funny!

 

[Locutus of Bored]

So. I can't believe in things that are controversial and post my opinion on them in a forum where idiotic flaming and thread derailment is not allowed?

You want serious discussion or not.

Free school lunches weren't controversial or in need of "serious discussion" by anyone until the mouth-breathing morons at Faux News and likeminded news outlets and blogs who just take anything with the name Obama peripherally attached to it as the mark of the devil decided to make it an issue. Did anyone of any political stripe even consider feeding impoverished schoolchildren a problem before the First Lady became involved and it suddenly became "SOCIALISM!!!" and indoctrination?

So, no, you're not going to get to turn this forum into your pet projects area where you can troll it up without fear of being insulted. And besides, you can troll all you want in TNZ without consequences from the mods; here you're going to get infractions for it. Not for this thread, mind you, but for some of your more provocative comments like accusing everyone of supporting rape in your other thread. Stuff like that is not going to fly here, so I'd stick with TNZ if that's what you're interested in.

In the meantime, this is closed. You need to demonstrate that you're capable of having reasonable discussions in other threads before you get to start a bunch of "controversial" threads of your own.

And Chemahkuu, remember where you are. That kind of stuff is not allowed here.