- Dec 18, 2011
- 12,919
- 4,823
- 350
Over a million kids now eat three meals a day at school. And it's not because parents can't afford food, they just claim they are too busy. Seriously? You don't see your kids all day and now you want them to stay later at school so the tax payers can foot the bill for their dinner?
Okay, does this mean we send out less money for food stamps? If the children eat all their meals at school, the parents won't have to spend much for food for their children. A big excuse, er reason, for this is to free up time for families when the children get home. Does this mean the parents will eat at school or just go without dinner? I mean, they still have to eat and it will take the same effort to fix their own meals. It won't really free up time for parents, who still have themselves and other children, who aren't school age, to feed. It might even make the obesity problem worse because these children will eat at school and likely eat again with their family after they get home.
Dinner time has always been a time when families sat together and talked about their day. Many families have special traditions and family recipes that are favorites. Eating at a school cafeteria and being forced to eat more of Michelle's approved meals, will take away the joy of eating with family. Heck, some of those Michelle-approved meals I've seen pics of will take away the joy of eating altogether.
Feeding children a third meal before they leave school will mean they are eating dinner too early, then they'll be hungry again before bedtime and will be more likely to snack or just eat more than what is healthy.
I'm sure many children are hungry at the end of the school day. Schools across the country report that the majority of the crap served up at lunch winds up in the garbage. Maybe offering up more edible lunches will help more than another meal of that unidentifiable crap thrown on the trays, courtesy of Michelle's program.
If we are going to start feeding children, and maybe their families, at schools, then we should reduce the amount put on their EBT cards each month. Otherwise, they will be double-dipping into the tax payers' pockets.
We never see programs get fixed or streamlined. They keep adding more programs on top of the existing ones and it just invites more fraud, waste and abuse. Having one program that works would be best, but government never ends anything, no matter how bad it works. They only know how to create more and more programs.
Who are these parents who want their kids to come home already fed? Maybe the schools should bathe them as well and then help them finish their homework. Why should parents have to lift a finger?
Doing things a parent should be doing doesn't really open up more time for families. It merely transfers the responsibility to others. Having dinner with your children is quality time. What kid wants to stay later at school to eat another meal from the school cafeteria?
"The demand for dinner exceeds those who are in need: Some busy families have expressed desire for their children to come home already fed, freeing up time after school for sports, homework or family activities.
Rachel Dunifon, a policy professor at Cornell University, told the AP that the meals might "help alleviate stress."
"It could actually be good and open up more time for families," she said.
Rachel Sheffield, a policy analyst for The Heritage Foundation’s DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society, said that expanding a broken welfare system without first solving its problems is not an efficient way of helping those in need.
"The federal government currently operates about a dozen programs that provide food assistance to poor and lower-income Americans," Sheffield observed. "On top of food programs, there are about 70 other means-tested government welfare programs that provide cash, housing, medical care and social services. "
http://dailysignal.com/2015/01/18/1-million-kids-now-eating-dinner-school/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
Okay, does this mean we send out less money for food stamps? If the children eat all their meals at school, the parents won't have to spend much for food for their children. A big excuse, er reason, for this is to free up time for families when the children get home. Does this mean the parents will eat at school or just go without dinner? I mean, they still have to eat and it will take the same effort to fix their own meals. It won't really free up time for parents, who still have themselves and other children, who aren't school age, to feed. It might even make the obesity problem worse because these children will eat at school and likely eat again with their family after they get home.
Dinner time has always been a time when families sat together and talked about their day. Many families have special traditions and family recipes that are favorites. Eating at a school cafeteria and being forced to eat more of Michelle's approved meals, will take away the joy of eating with family. Heck, some of those Michelle-approved meals I've seen pics of will take away the joy of eating altogether.
Feeding children a third meal before they leave school will mean they are eating dinner too early, then they'll be hungry again before bedtime and will be more likely to snack or just eat more than what is healthy.
I'm sure many children are hungry at the end of the school day. Schools across the country report that the majority of the crap served up at lunch winds up in the garbage. Maybe offering up more edible lunches will help more than another meal of that unidentifiable crap thrown on the trays, courtesy of Michelle's program.
If we are going to start feeding children, and maybe their families, at schools, then we should reduce the amount put on their EBT cards each month. Otherwise, they will be double-dipping into the tax payers' pockets.
We never see programs get fixed or streamlined. They keep adding more programs on top of the existing ones and it just invites more fraud, waste and abuse. Having one program that works would be best, but government never ends anything, no matter how bad it works. They only know how to create more and more programs.
Who are these parents who want their kids to come home already fed? Maybe the schools should bathe them as well and then help them finish their homework. Why should parents have to lift a finger?
Doing things a parent should be doing doesn't really open up more time for families. It merely transfers the responsibility to others. Having dinner with your children is quality time. What kid wants to stay later at school to eat another meal from the school cafeteria?
"The demand for dinner exceeds those who are in need: Some busy families have expressed desire for their children to come home already fed, freeing up time after school for sports, homework or family activities.
Rachel Dunifon, a policy professor at Cornell University, told the AP that the meals might "help alleviate stress."
"It could actually be good and open up more time for families," she said.
Rachel Sheffield, a policy analyst for The Heritage Foundation’s DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society, said that expanding a broken welfare system without first solving its problems is not an efficient way of helping those in need.
"The federal government currently operates about a dozen programs that provide food assistance to poor and lower-income Americans," Sheffield observed. "On top of food programs, there are about 70 other means-tested government welfare programs that provide cash, housing, medical care and social services. "
http://dailysignal.com/2015/01/18/1-million-kids-now-eating-dinner-school/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
