This is such an obvious non partisan no Brainer. So it definitely will never happen in the US on a meaningful scale.
Alas, it is partisan. Republicans love to see the poor people suffer because it makes them feel superior.
Why is feeding children so controversial?
Because once we start doing socialism for kids, people will start asking for socialism for everyone, and the ultra rich wants to keep that under control.
“Socialism! Marxists!”
Because it’s being called “free” when it is not.
You’re right. It’s better than free. It sets those kids up for a healthier life, making them more well rounded into adulthood. It’s a highly returning investment in our future.
But if they deserved to eat, they would’ve been born into families that could feed them.
“If they’re going to die they’d better do it and decrease the surplus population!” Okay, Ebenezer, you go off.
Are you alright man?
Not shit Sherlock, taxes would pay for it. Better to have our money feeding fat kids than buying more bombs for the IDF.
How much will the children have to pay each time they get a lunch? Or is it more like a subscription where they pay per month or something?
Because they’re obese
Your weight loss solution is starvation then? That’ll kill 'em faster than obesity will.
It’ll solve the obesity as well as the financial and logistical issues the article cites
My wife works at an elementary school, and a fair number of the kids depend on those school lunches as the only food they might eat that day. The school is in a mixed and low income neighborhood, and for some of the families this is how their kids get most of their meals.
You idiots. Kids with fewer financial burdens don’t want to work in the factory farms! Plus when they do their fancy learning they start to figure out that there could be a better way of life than getting their limbs removed by machines last serviced when they were in diapers. It’s almost like you think kids are white men the way you’re talking about about taking care of them
No shit sherlock. News break: sending the equivalent of one little merger in the US to countries who cant provide their people with food would make us all live better.
deleted by creator
Most of what a kid eats is what their parents eat
Did you read the article? What if most of what a kid is eating isn’t what their parents are eating?
Since that time, there has been a substantial increase in schools participating in the Community Eligibility Provision, a federal policy that allows schools in high poverty areas to provide free breakfast and lunch to all attending students.
So these kids are eating two meals a day that aren’t directly provided by their parent. Sounds like most of their meals aren’t what their parents are eating.
Also, if they are in extreme hardship, they may not even get to eat dinner with their parents.
deleted by creator
Nah, talking about what kids eat compared to what their parents eat.
deleted by creator
But your argument is that they are obese because they eat what their parents eat, right? So if 2/3rds of their meals aren’t from those unhealthy parents, wouldn’t the kids be healthier?
deleted by creator
So this is a good thing then?
If only we could get something healthy that isn’t a piece of pizza in disguise.
Seeing the free meals provided by our schools over COVID they would cover their protein requirements by cheese there was rarely meat in any of the meals.
Use punctuation.
