Posted on 05/24/2017 6:22:41 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
As a candidate, Mayor de Blasio promised to enact universal free school lunch in New York City public schools. The Mayor has aggressively pursued policies to decrease inequality in the City and clearly understands the important links among food access, health, and learning. From affordable housing to universal pre-K, the Mayor has worked to address the needs of poor and working class New Yorkers. But universal school lunch sticks out as an unfulfilled pledge.
I’ve written previously about the merits of eliminating school lunch fees and getting more kids to eat lunch at school. A hungry child can’t learn or realize her full potential. Hungry kids find it harder to do what is good for their health and engage in a natural part of growing up: being physically active and playing.
Many kids in New York City public schools do already qualify for free or reduced price lunch, but many of those who are eligible do not participate in the lunch program. What stops them? It’s simple: Stigma. Bullying. Shaming.
Students, especially in high school, skip the lunch program to avoid the embarrassment associated with being poor. Our schools provide textbooks, pencils, and other supplies to all students, regardless of income, but when it comes to food, public schools discriminate. Forcing kids to identify themselves as poor results in lasting shame and harm to fragile psyches. And make no mistake, the stigma is real and painful. It creates a false sense of inferiority, which is especially hard to shake when it is established at a young age....
(Excerpt) Read more at huffingtonpost.com ...
Since making something a right means the taxpayers have to pay for it, where is my gun voucher?
—amazing what a program to get rid of post WW2 food surpluses has become-—
You know, once I got out of K-6 and found out no one was going to make eat that garbage; I used lunch as a free period and kept my lunch money as extra cash.
Remember when we had to add school breakfasts to the taxpayers tab because the Poor were too hungry to learn because the parent at home didn’t feed them? So free breakfasts were added, scores continued to plummet and then the experts yammered about childhood obesity. Then the Left can’t figure out why the sensible American is tired of paying taxes on failed Socialist programs.
Speaking of that, when I was in the Army you could go to the Rec Center gun range and get a free box of .22 to shoot every day. I did that pretty often at Fort Hood.
Gee,I started school in The Great Depression and we had to go home for lunch.
There was no complaining.
My mother had been widowed yet she still fed us.
They had the silly idea that parents were responsible for feeding the children.
.
The solution to this type of privilege is to just make a big vat of soup and hand each kid a bowl of it daily. Army cooks can make something like this for 20 cents a bowl. I’m guessing the anti-soup crowd will fight it tooth and nail.
I bought tacos and a pop on the walk home and had money to spare.
But look at how successful the feeding program has been.
Go to Walmart. Look at the school aged kids. Not a skinny one! Half of them are obese. Nobody is going hungry.
It would actually be empowering for the parents to be able to choose the best way to budget their food allowance. It would also cut down on the food that's thrown away. It is true, there are children who throw a lot of their free food away and eat stuff they brought to school instead.
My late father’s “lunch” was a piece of cornbread with a dollop of lard. But he usually was hired out to help support a large family. When we watched “The Waltons” he’d say “those were the rich people.”
So people who can afford it shouldn’t pay ...but all taxpayers should pay for all lunches.
There was a point when I was growing up when my family qualified for free lunches. My mother wouldn’t do it. I thought it was stupid not to do it. I don’t remember why she wouldn’t do it...but probably some of the points listed in this article. She never accepted any kind of welfare.
No govt cheese. No food stamps. Etc
We never did without.
She would have never advocated for everyone to get a free lunch.
Good point!
I want my gun and ammo voucher.
That is why the Pilgrims came to this country. For the right to sit back and have other people get you some food.
This is ridiculous thinking. With the technology they use in the school lunch programs now, the students just punch in a code at the “checkout” area. No one would have any idea who gets free lunches or who pays their own way.
I think the mayor is trying to just be sure lunch is universally “free”, which can never be turned back, and only heartless GOP candidates would ever threaten to try.
This policy is meant only to trap future dem voters, IMHO.
What’s even more irritating is that schools now promote these ‘FREE’ meals, throughout the summer! And, guess what? You don’t even have to be of school age to receive this ‘FREE’ meal!
All compliments of you, me and the other taxpayers.
Nothing that someone else has to pay for is a ‘right.’
That includes food, shelter, clothing, education, and medical care. None of these things are rights.
If you can’t afford a peanut butter sandwich for your kid, better put him up for adoption. And if you get FOOD STAMPS your kid should not be eligible for a free school lunch.
Also, hungry kids learn just fine. Look at all the anorexic girls going to Ivy League schools.
TANSTAAFL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.