Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
it does not follow. truthfully i should not have agreed when you said that lifestyle was a larger factor. that encompasses a lot of things.probably. but then the government doesn't control lifestyle.but government money should only be spent to make kids fat in your opinion, right?I'm all for spending money to make our kids healthy.
I'm all for parents spending money to make their kids healthy.
Government school lunches didn't make kids fat several decades back. Obviously, lifestyle is a more significant contributor.
It follows, then, that attempts to control what kids eat for lunch at school probably won't have a very great impact on childhood obesity. Like many things coming out of Washington, the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves.
probably. but then the government doesn't control lifestyle.but government money should only be spent to make kids fat in your opinion, right?I'm all for spending money to make our kids healthy.
I'm all for parents spending money to make their kids healthy.
Government school lunches didn't make kids fat several decades back. Obviously, lifestyle is a more significant contributor.
It follows, then, that attempts to control what kids eat for lunch at school probably won't have a very great impact on childhood obesity. Like many things coming out of Washington, the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves.
weird. you seem to have moved from a position of "the government feeds kids too little" to "the government feeds kids too much." which is it?probably. but then the government doesn't control lifestyle.but government money should only be spent to make kids fat in your opinion, right?I'm all for parents spending money to make their kids healthy.
Government school lunches didn't make kids fat several decades back. Obviously, lifestyle is a more significant contributor.
It follows, then, that attempts to control what kids eat for lunch at school probably won't have a very great impact on childhood obesity. Like many things coming out of Washington, the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves.
"....the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves."
Gonna disagree, hadit.....It goes far further....to the Left.
a. “In a locally unprecedented move, the School District of Philadelphia will hold principals accountable for the number of students eating breakfast in their schools. Breakfast participation will be part of the report card that rates principals each year, along with categories such as attendance and math and reading performance.” In city schools breakfast s now on the principal The head of each school will be held responsible for ensuring that students are well-fed. - Philly.com
- We start ‘em young in dependency.. at the breakfast table! Principals responsible for increasing the numbers!!! Teach dependency, right up there with reading, math, discipline, and graduation rates.
2. School breakfast is now a universal freebie….regardless of need or family income!
a. “In Pueblo, school officials take a counterintuitive approach: They offer free breakfast to all children regardless of income, so no one is embarrassed to be eating it. In most schools here, breakfast is served right in the classrooms. …Feeding free breakfast to students who can afford to pay avoids the stigma for students who can't but don't want everyone to know. Serving breakfast in class means kids don't have to get there early to be fed, Kidd and other school nutrition directors say. Bus schedules, parents' work schedules, and, for high school students, the desire to sleep as late as possible make getting to school early for breakfast difficult.” Breakfast in class Fight against kids hunger starts at school - USATODAY.com
b. Did you get the part about not worrying about being late?
c. The winner in the food lottery is New Mexico, where some 63% of students eat two meals a day in school.
Now....if you insist that the parent has no place in providing food for their own children, and there are lots of children in government schools.....well, better have one menu for all or the permutations are impossible to control.
Enter "Michelle's Menu," stage Left.
weird. you seem to have moved from a position of "the government feeds kids too little" to "the government feeds kids too much." which is it?probably. but then the government doesn't control lifestyle.but government money should only be spent to make kids fat in your opinion, right?
Government school lunches didn't make kids fat several decades back. Obviously, lifestyle is a more significant contributor.
It follows, then, that attempts to control what kids eat for lunch at school probably won't have a very great impact on childhood obesity. Like many things coming out of Washington, the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves.
"....the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves."
Gonna disagree, hadit.....It goes far further....to the Left.
a. “In a locally unprecedented move, the School District of Philadelphia will hold principals accountable for the number of students eating breakfast in their schools. Breakfast participation will be part of the report card that rates principals each year, along with categories such as attendance and math and reading performance.” In city schools breakfast s now on the principal The head of each school will be held responsible for ensuring that students are well-fed. - Philly.com
- We start ‘em young in dependency.. at the breakfast table! Principals responsible for increasing the numbers!!! Teach dependency, right up there with reading, math, discipline, and graduation rates.
2. School breakfast is now a universal freebie….regardless of need or family income!
a. “In Pueblo, school officials take a counterintuitive approach: They offer free breakfast to all children regardless of income, so no one is embarrassed to be eating it. In most schools here, breakfast is served right in the classrooms. …Feeding free breakfast to students who can afford to pay avoids the stigma for students who can't but don't want everyone to know. Serving breakfast in class means kids don't have to get there early to be fed, Kidd and other school nutrition directors say. Bus schedules, parents' work schedules, and, for high school students, the desire to sleep as late as possible make getting to school early for breakfast difficult.” Breakfast in class Fight against kids hunger starts at school - USATODAY.com
b. Did you get the part about not worrying about being late?
c. The winner in the food lottery is New Mexico, where some 63% of students eat two meals a day in school.
Now....if you insist that the parent has no place in providing food for their own children, and there are lots of children in government schools.....well, better have one menu for all or the permutations are impossible to control.
Enter "Michelle's Menu," stage Left.
so what exactly is your complaint? because is sure thought that your post about the girl taking a picture of her lunch was about kids not getting enough lunch.weird. you seem to have moved from a position of "the government feeds kids too little" to "the government feeds kids too much." which is it?probably. but then the government doesn't control lifestyle.Government school lunches didn't make kids fat several decades back. Obviously, lifestyle is a more significant contributor.
It follows, then, that attempts to control what kids eat for lunch at school probably won't have a very great impact on childhood obesity. Like many things coming out of Washington, the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves.
"....the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves."
Gonna disagree, hadit.....It goes far further....to the Left.
a. “In a locally unprecedented move, the School District of Philadelphia will hold principals accountable for the number of students eating breakfast in their schools. Breakfast participation will be part of the report card that rates principals each year, along with categories such as attendance and math and reading performance.” In city schools breakfast s now on the principal The head of each school will be held responsible for ensuring that students are well-fed. - Philly.com
- We start ‘em young in dependency.. at the breakfast table! Principals responsible for increasing the numbers!!! Teach dependency, right up there with reading, math, discipline, and graduation rates.
2. School breakfast is now a universal freebie….regardless of need or family income!
a. “In Pueblo, school officials take a counterintuitive approach: They offer free breakfast to all children regardless of income, so no one is embarrassed to be eating it. In most schools here, breakfast is served right in the classrooms. …Feeding free breakfast to students who can afford to pay avoids the stigma for students who can't but don't want everyone to know. Serving breakfast in class means kids don't have to get there early to be fed, Kidd and other school nutrition directors say. Bus schedules, parents' work schedules, and, for high school students, the desire to sleep as late as possible make getting to school early for breakfast difficult.” Breakfast in class Fight against kids hunger starts at school - USATODAY.com
b. Did you get the part about not worrying about being late?
c. The winner in the food lottery is New Mexico, where some 63% of students eat two meals a day in school.
Now....if you insist that the parent has no place in providing food for their own children, and there are lots of children in government schools.....well, better have one menu for all or the permutations are impossible to control.
Enter "Michelle's Menu," stage Left.
I never said the government feeds kids too little.
You lie again.
so what exactly is your complaint? because is sure thought that your post about the girl taking a picture of her lunch was about kids not getting enough lunch.weird. you seem to have moved from a position of "the government feeds kids too little" to "the government feeds kids too much." which is it?probably. but then the government doesn't control lifestyle.
It follows, then, that attempts to control what kids eat for lunch at school probably won't have a very great impact on childhood obesity. Like many things coming out of Washington, the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves.
"....the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves."
Gonna disagree, hadit.....It goes far further....to the Left.
a. “In a locally unprecedented move, the School District of Philadelphia will hold principals accountable for the number of students eating breakfast in their schools. Breakfast participation will be part of the report card that rates principals each year, along with categories such as attendance and math and reading performance.” In city schools breakfast s now on the principal The head of each school will be held responsible for ensuring that students are well-fed. - Philly.com
- We start ‘em young in dependency.. at the breakfast table! Principals responsible for increasing the numbers!!! Teach dependency, right up there with reading, math, discipline, and graduation rates.
2. School breakfast is now a universal freebie….regardless of need or family income!
a. “In Pueblo, school officials take a counterintuitive approach: They offer free breakfast to all children regardless of income, so no one is embarrassed to be eating it. In most schools here, breakfast is served right in the classrooms. …Feeding free breakfast to students who can afford to pay avoids the stigma for students who can't but don't want everyone to know. Serving breakfast in class means kids don't have to get there early to be fed, Kidd and other school nutrition directors say. Bus schedules, parents' work schedules, and, for high school students, the desire to sleep as late as possible make getting to school early for breakfast difficult.” Breakfast in class Fight against kids hunger starts at school - USATODAY.com
b. Did you get the part about not worrying about being late?
c. The winner in the food lottery is New Mexico, where some 63% of students eat two meals a day in school.
Now....if you insist that the parent has no place in providing food for their own children, and there are lots of children in government schools.....well, better have one menu for all or the permutations are impossible to control.
Enter "Michelle's Menu," stage Left.
I never said the government feeds kids too little.
You lie again.
i guess when you just copy and paste something and refuse to give us any of your own analysis you can expect to be misunderstood from time to time.
i wouldn't call it a lie. i was wrong about your intentions.so what exactly is your complaint? because is sure thought that your post about the girl taking a picture of her lunch was about kids not getting enough lunch.weird. you seem to have moved from a position of "the government feeds kids too little" to "the government feeds kids too much." which is it?It follows, then, that attempts to control what kids eat for lunch at school probably won't have a very great impact on childhood obesity. Like many things coming out of Washington, the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves.
"....the biggest impact this would have is to allow some people to feel good about themselves."
Gonna disagree, hadit.....It goes far further....to the Left.
a. “In a locally unprecedented move, the School District of Philadelphia will hold principals accountable for the number of students eating breakfast in their schools. Breakfast participation will be part of the report card that rates principals each year, along with categories such as attendance and math and reading performance.” In city schools breakfast s now on the principal The head of each school will be held responsible for ensuring that students are well-fed. - Philly.com
- We start ‘em young in dependency.. at the breakfast table! Principals responsible for increasing the numbers!!! Teach dependency, right up there with reading, math, discipline, and graduation rates.
2. School breakfast is now a universal freebie….regardless of need or family income!
a. “In Pueblo, school officials take a counterintuitive approach: They offer free breakfast to all children regardless of income, so no one is embarrassed to be eating it. In most schools here, breakfast is served right in the classrooms. …Feeding free breakfast to students who can afford to pay avoids the stigma for students who can't but don't want everyone to know. Serving breakfast in class means kids don't have to get there early to be fed, Kidd and other school nutrition directors say. Bus schedules, parents' work schedules, and, for high school students, the desire to sleep as late as possible make getting to school early for breakfast difficult.” Breakfast in class Fight against kids hunger starts at school - USATODAY.com
b. Did you get the part about not worrying about being late?
c. The winner in the food lottery is New Mexico, where some 63% of students eat two meals a day in school.
Now....if you insist that the parent has no place in providing food for their own children, and there are lots of children in government schools.....well, better have one menu for all or the permutations are impossible to control.
Enter "Michelle's Menu," stage Left.
I never said the government feeds kids too little.
You lie again.
i guess when you just copy and paste something and refuse to give us any of your own analysis you can expect to be misunderstood from time to time.
Did you just run away from your lie?
You can run, but you can't hide.
The stuff you are citing is the ACA rules for maximum deduction. IOW if an HSA plan wanted to let you have a higher deductible for less premium cost, IT CAN'T BECAUSE THE ACA LAWS LIMIT HSA MAXIMUM DEDUCTION TO 5K SINGLE AND 10K FAMILY.
Nice try. But proving I'm right is not the same as proving I'm wrong. The reason HSAs made sense was you get a discount for taking the higher deductible. With govco mandating what that deductible is and what you have to fund that is not covered by the employee... they will be eliminating not just HSAs but all employer funded insurance plans through regulatory forced increases in cost of premiums.
If You Like Your School Lunch, You Can Keep It
And that is how you are 100% WRONG. HSA-HDHP pairings have NEVER BEFORE BEEN DEFINED BY THE IRS THAT'S RIGHT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAXING AGENCY IS NOW IN CHARGE OF SETTING MAXIMUMS RUN BY A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT WANTS SINGLE PAYER... WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?The stuff you are citing is the ACA rules for maximum deduction. IOW if an HSA plan wanted to let you have a higher deductible for less premium cost, IT CAN'T BECAUSE THE ACA LAWS LIMIT HSA MAXIMUM DEDUCTION TO 5K SINGLE AND 10K FAMILY.
Nice try. But proving I'm right is not the same as proving I'm wrong. The reason HSAs made sense was you get a discount for taking the higher deductible. With govco mandating what that deductible is and what you have to fund that is not covered by the employee... they will be eliminating not just HSAs but all employer funded insurance plans through regulatory forced increases in cost of premiums.
Plans coupled with HSAs have always had out-of-pocket limits that effectively capped the deductible. That's been true since they were created in 2003. When they were created in 2003, the law required that deductibles + other out-of-pocket spending be less than $5,000 for single coverage and less than $10,000 for family coverage.
Those numbers get adjusted each year for cost-of-living changes which is why they're up to $6,450 and $12,900, respectively, in 2015. Those limits on HDHPs don't come from the ACA, nor are they new. This is how HSA-HDHP pairings have always worked.
How utterly futile of you.
Or more appropriate it would be how utterly infantile of you.
You are so enthralled with yourself.
What a pity you don't have any sense of understanding of what message you are trying to convey.
But you do provide some laughable moments with your attempt to sound reasonable, but then it becomes a miserable failure.
You , think.
Seriously, nice try.
Another knee slapper.
Wait....let me find my SEM/EDX microscope electron` in hope of finding any hint of 'errors' that you listed .....
Hmmmm.....
You don't seem to have included any.....
An oversight on your part?
Oh...I see....just one more permutation of a 'I can't find any errors but I still hate you' post.
Seems to be quite a few of 'em from the Leftist swine.....
Take a seat with the rest of them.
"....but then it becomes a miserable failure."
What????
Still not one example of that supposed failure?
Must mean that every single thing I've posted is true and accurate.
Seems that you are the failure, huh?
Seems you and I agree...your attempts to find errors in my posts proved futile.
Bet you're just as much a failure at everything you do.
And that is how you are 100% WRONG. HSA-HDHP pairings have NEVER BEFORE BEEN DEFINED BY THE IRS THAT'S RIGHT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAXING AGENCY IS NOW IN CHARGE OF SETTING MAXIMUMS RUN BY A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT WANTS SINGLE PAYER... WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?
Yeah... and SS started out as a 2% tax and is now 15%.And that is how you are 100% WRONG. HSA-HDHP pairings have NEVER BEFORE BEEN DEFINED BY THE IRS THAT'S RIGHT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAXING AGENCY IS NOW IN CHARGE OF SETTING MAXIMUMS RUN BY A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT WANTS SINGLE PAYER... WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?
Here's one of the first IRS bulletins (from January 2004) laying out the requirements around HSAs, shortly after the 2003 law creating them was passed: Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2004-2
Yeah... and SS started out as a 2% tax and is now 15%.And that is how you are 100% WRONG. HSA-HDHP pairings have NEVER BEFORE BEEN DEFINED BY THE IRS THAT'S RIGHT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAXING AGENCY IS NOW IN CHARGE OF SETTING MAXIMUMS RUN BY A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT WANTS SINGLE PAYER... WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?
Here's one of the first IRS bulletins (from January 2004) laying out the requirements around HSAs, shortly after the 2003 law creating them was passed: Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2004-2
Your not listening. The IRS was responsible for managing the tax implications for HSA accounts. NOW THE IRS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MANAGING WHETHER OR NOT INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE ALLOWED TO SELL INSURANCE WITH HSA PLANS based on those plans meeting "bronze" guidelines of ACA. Do you or do you not understand the difference.Yeah... and SS started out as a 2% tax and is now 15%.And that is how you are 100% WRONG. HSA-HDHP pairings have NEVER BEFORE BEEN DEFINED BY THE IRS THAT'S RIGHT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAXING AGENCY IS NOW IN CHARGE OF SETTING MAXIMUMS RUN BY A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT WANTS SINGLE PAYER... WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?
Here's one of the first IRS bulletins (from January 2004) laying out the requirements around HSAs, shortly after the 2003 law creating them was passed: Internal Revenue Bulletin: 2004-2
I don't know what that has to do with the fact that limits on deductibles for HDHPs paired with HSAs have been on the books since HSAs were created a decade ago. And the IRS has always been responsible for enforcing those provisions and calculating what those limits are from one year to the next. It doesn't have anything to do with the ACA.
