If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MLive.com)   Not News: eight-year old watches fellow student with delinquent lunch tab get a cold sandwich instead of a hot school meal. Fark: eight-year old raises $14,000 to pay for 4,000 reduced-price meals   (mlive.com) divider line 186
    More: Hero, school meal, fellow students, classmates, Lansing, elementary schools, students  
•       •       •

4860 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Mar 2014 at 8:56 AM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



186 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-03-06 08:48:21 AM
That's true charity.  The kid saw a need, and asked people to help him to help others voluntarily.  Bravo, young Sir.
 
2014-03-06 08:53:35 AM
Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??
 
2014-03-06 08:54:40 AM
Now every kid at the school can enjoy assorted horse parts.
 
2014-03-06 08:58:49 AM
Guh, I hate the word 'meal'
 
2014-03-06 08:59:59 AM

xanadian: Lunches were free.


went to high school in the 80's.  Lunch at school was CHEAP, but never free unless you were one of the poor kids.  But us regular kids were paying, what, a buck 50 or so.  milk was a dime, i think.
 
2014-03-06 09:01:16 AM

DecemberNitro: Guh, I hate the word 'meal'


A sandwich is a sandwich, but a Manwich is a meal.

Or a Man Witch is a Warlock.
I can never keep that straight.
 
2014-03-06 09:01:36 AM

xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??


Those gold-plated six-figure public-employee pensions aren't free, you know.  Somebody has to pay for them.
 
2014-03-06 09:01:58 AM
Good for him! I gotta say though reading through it something struck me...
"the students to take an alternate lunch of a sandwich, fruit and milk. "
Sad to say that's probably a better lunch than I will have today so I'm really not outraged. If school lunch is the same as it was when I was going to elementary school the kids are probably coming out better nutrition and taste wise with the sandwich milk and fruit.
 
2014-03-06 09:04:01 AM

dittybopper: That's true charity.  The kid saw a need, and asked people to help him to help others voluntarily.  Bravo, young Sir.


Fully agree!

And at least this wasn't another story of some school actually trashing food because of the negative balance, and while the kids didn't get a hot meal, they at least got food. But still, very awesome of the kid to do this, hopefully he never loses his desire to help others.
 
2014-03-06 09:04:09 AM
I hope the other kid's parent get inspired.
 
2014-03-06 09:05:53 AM
Considering I ate pizza, at full price all the way through high school and am a tubby fat ass, those kids should be excited at not having cholesterol, blood pressure and weight issues in their future.
 
2014-03-06 09:06:48 AM
I think it's abhorrent that the school system has two classes of meals.   You would think if there is one place on earth that should attempt to treat children equally its the public school system.
 
2014-03-06 09:07:33 AM

seniorgato: Considering I ate pizza, at full price all the way through high school and am a tubby fat ass, those kids should be excited at not having cholesterol, blood pressure and weight issues in their future.


mksiemionko.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-03-06 09:07:58 AM

Phinn: xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??

Those gold-plated six-figure public-employee pensions aren't free, you know.  Somebody has to pay for them.


^This^

Along with third world levels of corruption.  No-show jobs, pay-to-play, nepotism, patronage, no-bid contracts......
 
2014-03-06 09:08:18 AM
memedepot.com
 
2014-03-06 09:08:21 AM
Everybody a mandatory criminal , the new Law Enforcement education system of the 21st century!
 
2014-03-06 09:11:09 AM
Cheese eating surrender monkeys.
 
2014-03-06 09:12:24 AM
What's wrong with a sandwich?
 
2014-03-06 09:13:14 AM
Why aren't the parents feeding their own kids? The most basic need of all, food is being neglected by these totally irresponsible parents. I'll be they all have DirecTV and an iPhone, though.
 
2014-03-06 09:15:11 AM

SuperChuck: What's wrong with a sandwich?


Nothing, whats wrong is humiliating small children because their parents can't afford to feed them.  When these kids grow, some of them are going to realize what a raw deal they got.  Remember that a few years from now, when they're getting ready to parade your head around on the end of a pike.
 
2014-03-06 09:15:31 AM

xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??


Obama's world.
 
2014-03-06 09:15:50 AM

SuperChuck: What's wrong with a sandwich?


I was thinking the same thing, what is wrong with a sandwich? I send my kid to school everyday with a sandwich for lunch.
 
2014-03-06 09:17:22 AM

Pick: Why aren't the parents feeding their own kids? The most basic need of all, food is being neglected by these totally irresponsible parents. I'll be they all have DirecTV and an iPhone, though.


And a refrigerator!
 
2014-03-06 09:19:09 AM
This kid raises money to feed others.

I did a science project where I grew some bean seeds

to show that..

because...

Well, I showed that some seeds grow into plants.  Really groundbreaking stuff.
 
2014-03-06 09:19:25 AM
I graduated high school ten years ago. We had regular school food which was cheap and 3rd party vendors. Domino's pizza, subway and a grill that had really good chicken sandwiches and stuff. My senior year we had an Outback Steakhouse express and a cafeteria that was set up like a mall food court.
 
2014-03-06 09:19:55 AM
I worked at a Golden Corral all through high school. I never ate lunch at school, just waited until after school and raided the good food at the Corral.
 
2014-03-06 09:21:18 AM
good on the kid but sadly we live in a country where a child needs to raise money for other children to eat food.
 
2014-03-06 09:23:32 AM

seniorgato: Considering I ate pizza, at full price all the way through high school and am a tubby fat ass, those kids should be excited at not having cholesterol, blood pressure and weight issues in their future.


oatmeal all over the place, thanks a lot.
 
2014-03-06 09:24:03 AM
Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.
 
2014-03-06 09:24:31 AM
I like the kid standing up and doing something, I'm just a bit confused on what the child thought the problem was? Was having kids get a free sandwhich some injustice that needed to be corrected?
 
2014-03-06 09:27:10 AM

xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??


No, they weren't free.  TANSTAAFL.  *SOMEBODY* was paying for them.

Also, we had to pay for our lunches when I was a kid, even back in the early 1970's.
 
2014-03-06 09:27:44 AM
Of course, people will have a problem with this.

/"as long as it's not seafood!"
//definitely not obscure
 
2014-03-06 09:27:56 AM

ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.


I thoroughly agree.  Lets just take the money from the teachers unions.
 
2014-03-06 09:28:37 AM

dittybopper: xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??

No, they weren't free.  TANSTAAFL.  *SOMEBODY* was paying for them.

Also, we had to pay for our lunches when I was a kid, even back in the early 1970's.


Or bring our own, if we didn't like what was scheduled that day, and mom was feeling indulgent enough to pack us a lunch.
 
2014-03-06 09:29:49 AM
It would've been better if he raised all that money to buy up all of the sandwiches & then throw them away, like the adults do.
 
2014-03-06 09:31:28 AM
Noble cause and everything but not really necessary as the school will provide a lunch regardless.
Also, my school didn't have any sort of cafeteria. You brought your own lunch and it was always a cold sandwich, snack and drink.
 
2014-03-06 09:32:09 AM

Tricky Chicken: I thoroughly agree. Lets just take the money from the teachers unions.


I also hate groups that advocate for middle class people to get better wages and benefits,  let's hang out.
 
2014-03-06 09:32:25 AM

ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.


I dont know  Qatar, Luxenborg, or Norway if kids are going  hungry.  But no child in this school was going hungry.  Who's said there was nutrional segregation? Who's to say the sandwhich and fruit is any less nutritious than the other meals?
 
2014-03-06 09:34:18 AM

xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??


When did schools start serving breakfast? I never got breakfast at school. Yes, I'm old.
 
2014-03-06 09:34:28 AM
Back in my day*, if you didn't incite small children to beg for money on your behalf, you didn't eat!

*This has continued up to the present day for me
 
2014-03-06 09:36:33 AM

Headso: Tricky Chicken: I thoroughly agree. Lets just take the money from the teachers unions.

I also hate groups that advocate for middle class people to get better wages and benefits,  let's hang out.


Well, the money for the advocated free lunches has to come from somewhere in the education budget. What do you suggest cutting to pay for it? I think it is funny that they are advocating free lunches for the children of millionaires.
 
2014-03-06 09:38:49 AM
Personally, I think the whole free/reduced lunch system is broken. We attempted to make it fair and make sure that every kid gets at least one good meal per day by making the meals free or reduced for lower income families, but we still end up with parents who don't pay their bills and kids who get left out. A few storied like this actually make the news, but it's happening millions of times each day all across the country. Just make the program free and feed the damn kids. If we can afford to spend billions of dollars on welfare for the richest corporations the world has ever seen, we can afford a few sloppy joes for schoolkids.
 
2014-03-06 09:39:05 AM

TNel: Pick: Why aren't the parents feeding their own kids? The most basic need of all, food is being neglected by these totally irresponsible parents. I'll be they all have DirecTV and an iPhone, though.

And a refrigerator!


TNel, assuming you're being sarcastic...  this is the fundamental problem with all of these welfare programs.  There are lots of kids whose parents simply choose to spend their money on other non-essential stuff, then cry that they can't afford the essentials for their children.  So we pay for the kids, and resent the whole system.  But at the heart of it, it's a good idea.  Because there are really kids who can't afford meals.  And, frankly, if you can look at a hungry kid and not want to feed him, well, you're a better man than me.

/ Believe in financial responsibility
// Can't bear to watch a kid suffer
 
2014-03-06 09:40:27 AM
Why when I was a boy I had to carry biscuits under my arms to keep them warm as I walked 5 miles to school in the snow. Up hill, both ways.
 
2014-03-06 09:41:00 AM

ThunderPelvis: No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry


And mostly, they don't.  In fact, the more poor a child happens to be in America, the more likely they are to be obese:

diabetes.diabetesjournals.org

http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/60/11/2667.full

What we have in America isn't a significant number of kids not getting enough caloric intake.  The poor kids clearly get enough food.

The malnutrition death rate in the United States is extremely low, about the same as other developed Western nations like The Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Japan, and Belgium, and it's roughly half that of France and Israel:
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/malnutrition/by-co un try/

What we have in the United States is kids that aren't getting enough of the *RIGHT* kinds of foods, and enough exercise to offset the effects of the wrong kinds.   Very few kids in the US go to bed hungry on a regular basis.  It does happen, of course (something you'll *NEVER* completely get rid of), but it's just not what I would think of as a pressing problem.  In fact, we have the opposite:  The poor kids are taking in too many calories and not burning them off.
 
2014-03-06 09:44:11 AM

Danger Mouse: ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.

I dont know  Qatar, Luxenborg, or Norway if kids are going  hungry.  But no child in this school was going hungry.  Who's said there was nutrional segregation? Who's to say the sandwhich and fruit is any less nutritious than the other meals?


I'd tell you you're a massive piece of sh*t, but he's already taken care of that preemptively. When I was a kid, I took a bag lunch to school. It was usually a sandwich, piece of fruit, chips, and a juice box. Apparently my mom was mistreating me and not supplying my nutritional needs. And anyone who disagrees with my spectacular assessment is a bedwetter.
 
2014-03-06 09:46:07 AM

James!: Why when I was a boy I had to carry biscuits under my arms to keep them warm as I walked 5 miles to school in the snow. Up hill, both ways.


You had arms?!?!?!  We were so poor we had to share a 2nd hand prostheticbetween 4 kids!
 
2014-03-06 09:48:33 AM

ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.


Also mr Hypocrite, is being the child of a rich person a 'string attached'?
 
2014-03-06 09:48:50 AM

Splish: Danger Mouse: ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.

I dont know  Qatar, Luxenborg, or Norway if kids are going  hungry.  But no child in this school was going hungry.  Who's said there was nutrional segregation? Who's to say the sandwhich and fruit is any less nutritious than the other meals?

I'd tell you you're a massive piece of sh*t, but he's already taken care of that preemptively. When I was a kid, I took a bag lunch to school. It was usually a sandwich, piece of fruit, chips, and a juice box. Apparently my mom was mistreating me and not supplying my nutritional needs. And anyone who disagrees with my spectacular assessment is a bedwetter.


?
 
2014-03-06 09:48:54 AM
When has school lunch ever been free for all?

In the 60s in elementary school it was $1.00 per month for hot lunch.

Kids that didn't pay either brought their own or ate nothing.

In the late 60s to early 70s the free or reduced price lunch was started but only for very low income families.

In high school in the 70s lunch was $1.50 per week and breakfast was free for all.

And the food was just as bad then as it is now in schools.
 
2014-03-06 09:51:12 AM
Wait a minute.  $3.50 is a reduced price meal?

Does the school just run down to McDonalds and buy up a bunch of kids meals then keep the toys for themselves?
 
2014-03-06 09:51:41 AM

RDixon: When has school lunch ever been free for all?

In the 60s in elementary school it was $1.00 per month for hot lunch.

Kids that didn't pay either brought their own or ate nothing.

In the late 60s to early 70s the free or reduced price lunch was started but only for very low income families.

In high school in the 70s lunch was $1.50 per week and breakfast was free for all.

And the food was just as bad then as it is now in schools.


It's not about the food, it's about shaming small children for being poor.
 
2014-03-06 09:52:34 AM

abhorrent1: xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??

When did schools start serving breakfast? I never got breakfast at school. Yes, I'm old.


It wasn't all of them.  I think the school where I finished up high school had the option.  And the elementary school where I did 5th and 6th grade (I moved around a lot--divorced parents, you see...).  They were always pay-for things.  Poor kids could get waivers, though.

dittybopper: xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??

No, they weren't free.  TANSTAAFL.  *SOMEBODY* was paying for them.

Also, we had to pay for our lunches when I was a kid, even back in the early 1970's.


Yes, and those somebody's were the taxpayers.  My high school was contemplating charging for lunches back when I went there, but the parents went up in arms about it.  Of course, I guess it really depends on where you live.  The town I'm in now lets kids eat free, I believe ...but we also have an insanely high mil rate.  Property taxes here suck.
 
2014-03-06 09:55:59 AM

mod3072: Personally, I think the whole free/reduced lunch system is broken. We attempted to make it fair and make sure that every kid gets at least one good meal per day by making the meals free or reduced for lower income families, but we still end up with parents who don't pay their bills and kids who get left out. A few storied like this actually make the news, but it's happening millions of times each day all across the country. Just make the program free and feed the damn kids. If we can afford to spend billions of dollars on welfare for the richest corporations the world has ever seen, we can afford a few sloppy joes for schoolkids.


My son's school took a community option for four years. Something like 75% of his school qualified for free or reduced lunches, so every kid in the grade school gets free breakfast and lunch. They do this during the summer when school's out, too. I wish all school districts could/would do this.
 
2014-03-06 09:56:36 AM
Give the little gold-diggers nutra-loaf and put 'em in the box.

static.tvtropes.org
 
2014-03-06 09:57:48 AM
Good for this kid, way to think of others.

My son's a 5th grader, I get up with him every morning and make him breakfast. I offer to make lunch and in the beginning of the school year he usually brown bags it, after a while he decided that he like a hot meal at lunch so we send money instead of a cold sandwich. Honestly I'd rather have a pizza, or burger or tacos than a cold sandwich any day and so would he.

/Fresh made sandwiches are good...
//bagged and in locker for 5 hour sandwiches...not so much
///I would have no problem with my taxes going to feed every kid a hot lunch.
 
2014-03-06 09:58:01 AM

Danger Mouse: James!: Why when I was a boy I had to carry biscuits under my arms to keep them warm as I walked 5 miles to school in the snow. Up hill, both ways.

You had arms?!?!?!  We were so poor we had to share a 2nd hand prostheticbetween 4 kids!


You had siblings? We were so poor I had to be my mother, father, brother and creepy uncle. UP HILL, BOTH WAYS!!
 
2014-03-06 10:01:38 AM

Phinn: xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??

Those gold-plated six-figure public-employee pensions aren't free, you know.  Somebody has to pay for them.


As a public employee with a pension plan, I'm really looking forward to my golden retirement check for $1200/month. I'm gonna be rich, I tell you!

(State government blue collar workers get paid shiat - don't believe what right-wing media yelps about)
 
2014-03-06 10:06:33 AM

ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.


If I'm responsible enough to feed my kids, why shouldn't I be forced to feed strangers kids as well?

You're more than welcome to give more of your to other people's kids. You're not welcome to force me to do the same.
 
2014-03-06 10:08:01 AM

Fissile: RDixon: When has school lunch ever been free for all?

In the 60s in elementary school it was $1.00 per month for hot lunch.

Kids that didn't pay either brought their own or ate nothing.

In the late 60s to early 70s the free or reduced price lunch was started but only for very low income families.

In high school in the 70s lunch was $1.50 per week and breakfast was free for all.

And the food was just as bad then as it is now in schools.

It's not about the food, it's about shaming small children for being poor.


You went to a pretty farked up school of people "shamed" the reduced lunch kids.
 
2014-03-06 10:08:57 AM

abhorrent1: xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??

When did schools start serving breakfast? I never got breakfast at school. Yes, I'm old.


They were doing so when my son started elementary school & that was in 1986, For some of the students the school breakfast & lunch was the only food they got each day. And schools offering breakfast is very important. A child learns better if they're not hungry.
 
2014-03-06 10:12:49 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Fissile: RDixon: When has school lunch ever been free for all?

In the 60s in elementary school it was $1.00 per month for hot lunch.

Kids that didn't pay either brought their own or ate nothing.

In the late 60s to early 70s the free or reduced price lunch was started but only for very low income families.

In high school in the 70s lunch was $1.50 per week and breakfast was free for all.

And the food was just as bad then as it is now in schools.

It's not about the food, it's about shaming small children for being poor.

You went to a pretty farked up school of people "shamed" the reduced lunch kids.


That's exactly what is happening to the kids at this school.   Kids that can pay: burgers and pizza.  Can't pay: Bowl of gruel.
 
2014-03-06 10:13:53 AM
If children are getting free breaksfest and lunch at school, are we reducing the familly's welfare payments accordingly? Seems like double dipping to me.
 
2014-03-06 10:13:58 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If I'm responsible enough to feed my kids, why shouldn't I be forced to feed strangers kids as well?

You're more than welcome to give more of your to other people's kids. You're not welcome to force me to do the same.


It might make you angry that a child is being fed on your pittance of a contribution to such a program but if you need to look at it in a selfish way children who get good nourishment today will cost you less tomorrow in other ways.
 
2014-03-06 10:15:16 AM
So, how many rightwing death threats has this kid gotten so far?
 
2014-03-06 10:15:17 AM

Dirty Doug: TNel, assuming you're being sarcastic... this is the fundamental problem with all of these welfare programs. There are lots of kids whose parents simply choose to spend their money on other non-essential stuff, then cry that they can't afford the essentials for their children. So we pay for the kids, and resent the whole system. But at the heart of it, it's a good idea. Because there are really kids who can't afford meals. And, frankly, if you can look at a hungry kid and not want to feed him, well, you're a better man than me.

/ Believe in financial responsibility
// Can't bear to watch a kid suffer


I was being a bit sarcastic but I can't fault the parents if they want to spend $50 a month on TV service.  If that makes them feel "normal" and makes the kids happy when they are home then why not?   The kid was eating a sandwhich so they are still getting food.  The stigma of poor people is horrible and fox news doesn't help.  When you are constantly being picked on by the population I can't fault people for wanting to have some kind of luxury in their life.

Let's say this students parents just lost their job and went on unemployment but they have a contract with DirecTV if they break that contract they have to pay $250 or they keep paying the $50 a month thinking that in 5 months they should have a job so it would be stupid to break contract and be out $250 all at one time (which they don't have so it goes straight to a collection agency screwing their credit for 6 years).

We love to look at people from the outside and judge but we almost never get the full information.  Maybe the kid was getting a cold lunch because the parents didn't realize that the kid was in the negative.  Our school use to just put a slip of paper in the bookbag which was lost many times, so my kid ate the "I have no money to get a lunch" meal before, not because I was a bad person and didn't want to feed my kid but because I didn't realize he was out of money due to him eating breakfast, lunch, extra milk, extra fruit, etc; darn kid was spending over $5 a day on school food.
 
2014-03-06 10:22:12 AM
So, the kids parents help him set up a fundraiser to prove a political point, or at the least brought it to the attention of various bloggers and the media?  I'm unimpressed.

They're not feeding the poor, they're feeding the kids who have lazy/idiot parents who occasionally forget to send in the lunch money on time.

/My ex wife would very often "forget" to send in the lunch money, knowing that I'd cover it.  I hate scumbag parents.
 
2014-03-06 10:30:08 AM
If hot lunches are anything like they were when I was a kid, the schools should just phase out the hot lunches and give all kids sandwiches. Childhood obesity may be on the decline, but I can't see a good argument for feeding kids burgers, pizza, lasagne and sloppy joes every day.

All that stuff used to taste foul anyway when produced in tubs by the culinary geniuses employed at the school.
 
2014-03-06 10:31:06 AM

Ker_Thwap: So, the kids parents help him set up a fundraiser to prove a political point, or at the least brought it to the attention of various bloggers and the media?  I'm unimpressed.

They're not feeding the poor, they're feeding the kids who have lazy/idiot parents who occasionally forget to send in the lunch money on time.

/My ex wife would very often "forget" to send in the lunch money, knowing that I'd cover it.  I hate scumbag parents.


Who pissed in your Wheaties this morning?

1) Kid saw a problem.
2) Kid asked: "What can I do?"
3) Parents (who might have been shocked the moral lesson actually sunk in), went: "Well, let's see."
4) Everybody is happier.

Good on ya, kid.  And whoever taught you to look out for your fellow kid.
 
2014-03-06 10:32:47 AM

scut207: I think it's abhorrent that the school system has two classes of meals.   You would think if there is one place on earth that should attempt to treat children equally its the public school system.


According to the article, they are treating them equally. Any student (I'd assume regardless of color, gender, nationality, sexual orientation, parents' income level, etc) whose account goes more than five dollars negative will receive the free sandwich meal. That's as close to complete equality as you could ever ask for.

What the article didn't say was if the truly needy students didn't already always get free lunch and breakfast, the hot version. I'd be very surprised if they didn't. That's not equality; it's an approximation of fairness, and I don't think anyone has a problem with that either.
 
2014-03-06 10:35:04 AM
I have hope for this young generation. The entitled asshats in front of them? Not so much.
 
2014-03-06 10:36:03 AM
Any help from the adults? Probably.
 
2014-03-06 10:38:52 AM
Enjoy playing with money now, kid.  Good luck when you grow up and discover nobody named Cayden, Jayden, Braden, or any other -aden is taken seriously.
 
2014-03-06 10:42:46 AM

ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.


And a Democratic President who gives how many billions of our tax dollars to other nations? You need to point fingers at a wider variety of people. I do think every child in America should get food, but the money for that food needs to come from somewhere. I know that here in Memphis (and I know this for a fact because I used to deal with the school district's nutrition program) that a reduced-cost school lunch is only forty cents. Forty. Cents. If you're a parent and can't even afford forty cents, you're the massive piece of shiat. So no, your characterization is not accurate at all, but go ahead and call me a massive piece of shiat, and whatever other liberal buzzwords are in fashion right now.
 
2014-03-06 10:43:07 AM

Headso: It might make you angry that a child is being fed on your pittance of a contribution to such a program but if you need to look at it in a selfish way children who get good nourishment today will cost you less tomorrow in other ways.


THIS.  It is extremely short-sighted to not realise that everybody benefits from this.  It has been proven that kids who have a balanced diet have better levels of concentration and energy, meaning less disruption in class.  This means that the teacher will have more time to spare for actual teaching rather than dealing with trouble makers.  I have long maintained that private schools do better not only because they pay the teachers better but because all of the kids get a nutritionally balanced meal and pay attention more in class.

So for anybody who is opposed to this on ideological and ignorant grounds (looking at you  DJATTOD) just remember - your special little snowflake BENEFITS from this so you don't have to feel TOO bad about helping the less fortunate.
 
2014-03-06 10:43:49 AM

2 grams: If children are getting free breaksfest and lunch at school, are we reducing the familly's welfare payments accordingly? Seems like double dipping to me.


RAND PAUL?
 
2014-03-06 10:43:53 AM
What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?
 
2014-03-06 10:44:32 AM

Another Government Employee: Ker_Thwap: So, the kids parents help him set up a fundraiser to prove a political point, or at the least brought it to the attention of various bloggers and the media?  I'm unimpressed.

They're not feeding the poor, they're feeding the kids who have lazy/idiot parents who occasionally forget to send in the lunch money on time.

/My ex wife would very often "forget" to send in the lunch money, knowing that I'd cover it.  I hate scumbag parents.

Who pissed in your Wheaties this morning?

1) Kid saw a problem.
2) Kid asked: "What can I do?"
3) Parents (who might have been shocked the moral lesson actually sunk in), went: "Well, let's see."
4) Everybody is happier.

Good on ya, kid.  And whoever taught you to look out for your fellow kid.


Want to teach your kid a lesson, teach them that throwing money at a problem isn't always the smart answer.   You can replace the words "hot lunch" and "cold lunch" in this article with "tan lunch" and "beige lunch" and nothing changes.   Want to help the poor, there are a thousand charities who can better spend the money.

No one pissed in my cereal, it's just this family has done nothing to solve the root issues, and is engaged in self congratulatory masterbation.  How nice.
 
2014-03-06 10:48:02 AM

ph0rk: What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?


The issue isn't the sandwich, it's the fact that the kids are being treated differently for circumstances they can't control.
 
2014-03-06 10:53:32 AM

Ker_Thwap: Want to help the poor, there are a thousand charities who can better spend the money.


Yeah because when you give those charities $10k a whole $5k goes to the people that need it and the rest goes to overhead or you can do what this kid did and 100% goes to the people that need it.
 
2014-03-06 10:56:42 AM

Rindred: Phinn: xanadian: Wait.  Kids have to PAY for their school lunches!??  When I was a kid, it was only the breakfasts they served before opening bell that kids had to pay for (and it was optional, of course).  Lunches were free.  WHAT KIND OF A MAD, TWISTED WORLD ARE WE LIVING IN, NOW!??

Those gold-plated six-figure public-employee pensions aren't free, you know.  Somebody has to pay for them.

As a public employee with a pension plan, I'm really looking forward to my golden retirement check for $1200/month. I'm gonna be rich, I tell you!

(State government blue collar workers get paid shiat - don't believe what right-wing media yelps about)


You apparently haven't learned how to game the system as well as others have.  The state police in Michigan apparently let you retire after 25 years with a pension that is based on the "overtime" you previously were paid.  Hundreds of them have retired around age 50 making well over $100,000, for life.  There are school administrators and local police/fire employees who do the same.

Most don't do that well, of course.  As I said, somebody has to pay for those people.  There is no free lunch.
 
2014-03-06 10:58:08 AM

Danger Mouse: Splish: Danger Mouse: ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.

I dont know  Qatar, Luxenborg, or Norway if kids are going  hungry.  But no child in this school was going hungry.  Who's said there was nutrional segregation? Who's to say the sandwhich and fruit is any less nutritious than the other meals?

I'd tell you you're a massive piece of sh*t, but he's already taken care of that preemptively. When I was a kid, I took a bag lunch to school. It was usually a sandwich, piece of fruit, chips, and a juice box. Apparently my mom was mistreating me and not supplying my nutritional needs. And anyone who disagrees with my spectacular assessment is a bedwetter.

?


Sorry, I want trying to attack you in any way. I actually agree with you. I just had never seen a pre-emptive ad hominem laid out as the opening argument and had to needle you a little bit for stepping into it.
 
2014-03-06 11:03:51 AM

TNel: Ker_Thwap: Want to help the poor, there are a thousand charities who can better spend the money.

Yeah because when you give those charities $10k a whole $5k goes to the people that need it and the rest goes to overhead or you can do what this kid did and 100% goes to the people that need it.


You missed a crucial part of this equation.  It's Lansing Michigan, a place that does have real poverty concerns.  Let's say 30% of the children have poverty concerns.  So, 70% of this "charity" is to cover the lazy parents who can't plan in advance to send a check into the school once in a while.  I would not be shocked in the slightest to learn that this kid's parents are among those who occasionally forgot to send in the lunch money.

Again, it's easy enough to pop onto a charity search engine and pick one that you find has the proper percentages and goals.  Let's not pretend they're all 50% administration.
 
2014-03-06 11:09:10 AM
Why aren't the parents feeding their own children? Why is it the school's responsibility?
 
2014-03-06 11:10:55 AM

Splish: Danger Mouse: Splish: Danger Mouse: ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.

I dont know  Qatar, Luxenborg, or Norway if kids are going  hungry.  But no child in this school was going hungry.  Who's said there was nutrional segregation? Who's to say the sandwhich and fruit is any less nutritious than the other meals?

I'd tell you you're a massive piece of sh*t, but he's already taken care of that preemptively. When I was a kid, I took a bag lunch to school. It was usually a sandwich, piece of fruit, chips, and a juice box. Apparently my mom was mistreating me and not supplying my nutritional needs. And anyone who disagrees with my spectacular assessment is a bedwetter.

?

Sorry, I want trying to attack you in any way. I actually agree with you. I just had never seen a pre-emptive ad hominem laid out as the opening argument and had to needle you a little bit for stepping into it.


My only reply was that  1) The US is not the richest country in the world. and 2) that there was no evidence of segrgation.  Everything else where the rants of some one else.
 
2014-03-06 11:13:14 AM

Pick: Why aren't the parents feeding their own children? Why is it the school's responsibility?


Because the Republicans destroyed the economy a few years ago, and the load fell disproportionately on the bottom classes of people. They still need fed, though, or they'll die, and then who'll scrub the 1%'s toilets?
 
2014-03-06 11:13:47 AM
Does it really cost $3.50 for a lunch in school these days?  That sounds like about triple what it could/should be.  Back in my day lunch was $.35 and was, by and large, pretty good.  In fact some things were so good that I have tried, unsuccessfully, to duplicate them.  But then, I like SOS.
 
2014-03-06 11:17:53 AM

Pick: Why aren't the parents feeding their own children? Why is it the school's responsibility?


because you suck at trolling
 
2014-03-06 11:18:30 AM

QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?

The issue isn't the sandwich, it's the fact that the kids are being treated differently for circumstances they can't control.


Who's being treated differently? I think the problem is that they're being treated the same and you think they should be treated differently.

Johnny's mom is broke and can't pay the bill, but he qualifies for free hot lunch. Splendid.

David's mom is scraping by but they don't qualify for the free lunch program. They can't afford the bill this month, so he gets a sandwich. Outrage!

Madison's dad is a millionaire and forgets to pay the bill, so Madison gets a cold sandwich. Outrage? Or "It won't kill her. She's lucky she's getting anything at all. Maybe this will teach them some responsibility"?
 
2014-03-06 11:18:58 AM

strobis48z4: Does it really cost $3.50 for a lunch in school these days?  That sounds like about triple what it could/should be.  Back in my day lunch was $.35 and was, by and large, pretty good.  In fact some things were so good that I have tried, unsuccessfully, to duplicate them.  But then, I like SOS.


It's $2.10 here then ala carte for each additional item and that's where they bend you over.

Ker_Thwap: You missed a crucial part of this equation. It's Lansing Michigan, a place that does have real poverty concerns. Let's say 30% of the children have poverty concerns. So, 70% of this "charity" is to cover the lazy parents who can't plan in advance to send a check into the school once in a while. I would not be shocked in the slightest to learn that this kid's parents are among those who occasionally forgot to send in the lunch money.



And you are 100% sure about this and not pulling shiat out of your ass right?  Yeah just what I thought.  That's whats wrong with most Republicans they make up shiat that makes their world view a reality.
 
2014-03-06 11:21:58 AM

strobis48z4: Does it really cost $3.50 for a lunch in school these days?  That sounds like about triple what it could/should be.  Back in my day lunch was $.35 and was, by and large, pretty good.  In fact some things were so good that I have tried, unsuccessfully, to duplicate them.  But then, I like SOS.



I haven't had a Tatar Tot that tasted as good as the ones in the school cafeteria.
 
2014-03-06 11:24:13 AM

QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?

The issue isn't the sandwich, it's the fact that the kids are being treated differently for circumstances they can't control.


They probably can't control their verbal or math ability, either. Should they all be treated the same there, too?
 
2014-03-06 11:27:12 AM

Danger Mouse: Splish: Danger Mouse: Splish: Danger Mouse: ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.

I dont know  Qatar, Luxenborg, or Norway if kids are going  hungry.  But no child in this school was going hungry.  Who's said there was nutrional segregation? Who's to say the sandwhich and fruit is any less nutritious than the other meals?

I'd tell you you're a massive piece of sh*t, but he's already taken care of that preemptively. When I was a kid, I took a bag lunch to school. It was usually a sandwich, piece of fruit, chips, and a juice box. Apparently my mom was mistreating me and not supplying my nutritional needs. And anyone who disagrees with my spectacular assessment is a bedwetter.

?

Sorry, I want trying to attack you in any way. I actually agree with you. I just had never seen a pre-emptive ad hominem laid out as the opening argument and had to needle you a little bit for stepping into it.

My only reply was that  1) The US is not the richest country in the world. and 2) that there was no evidence of segrgation.  Everything else where the rants of some one else.


Yes, I know. I just thought it was funny that instead of ignoring the guy in the "I'm with stupid" T-shirt you walked over and stood in front of the arrow. That doesn't mean I think you're "stupid" or in this case "a massive piece of sh*t" for challenging his "accurate characterization." Apparently I didn't make that clear. I wasn't responding to you too disagree with you. This probably isn't a very graceful explanation either. Sorry.
 
2014-03-06 11:27:46 AM

TNel: strobis48z4: Does it really cost $3.50 for a lunch in school these days?  That sounds like about triple what it could/should be.  Back in my day lunch was $.35 and was, by and large, pretty good.  In fact some things were so good that I have tried, unsuccessfully, to duplicate them.  But then, I like SOS.

It's $2.10 here then ala carte for each additional item and that's where they bend you over.

Ker_Thwap: You missed a crucial part of this equation. It's Lansing Michigan, a place that does have real poverty concerns. Let's say 30% of the children have poverty concerns. So, 70% of this "charity" is to cover the lazy parents who can't plan in advance to send a check into the school once in a while. I would not be shocked in the slightest to learn that this kid's parents are among those who occasionally forgot to send in the lunch money.


And you are 100% sure about this and not pulling shiat out of your ass right?  Yeah just what I thought.  That's whats wrong with most Republicans they make up shiat that makes their world view a reality.


Not a Republican.  I looked up the poverty level in Lansing, it's 29%.  I read the article,"it was a relatively rare situation where they didn't make contact with the parent."  I drew on real life experience as a parent who's child occasionally didn't have lunch money (because of a lazy ex.)  Don't be so quick to read your own fears into someone elses motivations.
 
2014-03-06 11:27:52 AM
News: There are competent adults somewhere in society.

noticeably missing...

good luck kids :D

lelz

nanny 911 save us
 
2014-03-06 11:31:22 AM

Ker_Thwap: Another Government Employee: Ker_Thwap: So, the kids parents help him set up a fundraiser to prove a political point, or at the least brought it to the attention of various bloggers and the media?  I'm unimpressed.

They're not feeding the poor, they're feeding the kids who have lazy/idiot parents who occasionally forget to send in the lunch money on time.

/My ex wife would very often "forget" to send in the lunch money, knowing that I'd cover it.  I hate scumbag parents.

Who pissed in your Wheaties this morning?

1) Kid saw a problem.
2) Kid asked: "What can I do?"
3) Parents (who might have been shocked the moral lesson actually sunk in), went: "Well, let's see."
4) Everybody is happier.

Good on ya, kid.  And whoever taught you to look out for your fellow kid.

Want to teach your kid a lesson, teach them that throwing money at a problem isn't always the smart answer.   You can replace the words "hot lunch" and "cold lunch" in this article with "tan lunch" and "beige lunch" and nothing changes.   Want to help the poor, there are a thousand charities who can better spend the money.

No one pissed in my cereal, it's just this family has done nothing to solve the root issues, and is engaged in self congratulatory masterbation.  How nice.


At eight years old, that lesson would be lost.

He started as local as you can get. The kids next to him.  He made his little area of the world better.

A lot better than you have this morning.
 
2014-03-06 11:31:25 AM

Headso: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If I'm responsible enough to feed my kids, why shouldn't I be forced to feed strangers kids as well?

You're more than welcome to give more of your to other people's kids. You're not welcome to force me to do the same.

It might make you angry that a child is being fed on your pittance of a contribution to such a program but if you need to look at it in a selfish way children who get good nourishment today will cost you less tomorrow in other ways.


Eh, I doubt it. Many of the kids on the free lunch program at my high school ended up in and out of jail and with kids of their own that they couldn't feed by the time the were 20.
 
2014-03-06 11:31:46 AM

TNel: Dirty Doug: TNel, assuming you're being sarcastic... this is the fundamental problem with all of these welfare programs. There are lots of kids whose parents simply choose to spend their money on other non-essential stuff, then cry that they can't afford the essentials for their children. So we pay for the kids, and resent the whole system. But at the heart of it, it's a good idea. Because there are really kids who can't afford meals. And, frankly, if you can look at a hungry kid and not want to feed him, well, you're a better man than me.

/ Believe in financial responsibility
// Can't bear to watch a kid suffer

I was being a bit sarcastic but I can't fault the parents if they want to spend $50 a month on TV service.  If that makes them feel "normal" and makes the kids happy when they are home then why not?   The kid was eating a sandwhich so they are still getting food.  The stigma of poor people is horrible and fox news doesn't help.  When you are constantly being picked on by the population I can't fault people for wanting to have some kind of luxury in their life.

Let's say this students parents just lost their job and went on unemployment but they have a contract with DirecTV if they break that contract they have to pay $250 or they keep paying the $50 a month thinking that in 5 months they should have a job so it would be stupid to break contract and be out $250 all at one time (which they don't have so it goes straight to a collection agency screwing their credit for 6 years).

We love to look at people from the outside and judge but we almost never get the full information.  Maybe the kid was getting a cold lunch because the parents didn't realize that the kid was in the negative.  Our school use to just put a slip of paper in the bookbag which was lost many times, so my kid ate the "I have no money to get a lunch" meal before, not because I was a bad person and didn't want to feed my kid but because I didn't realize he was out of money due to him eating ...


Boy, I really hope this is a troll, and not your actual belief.  If you as a parent are choosing DirectTV over making sure your kids have food, you are a terrible parent.  FFS, get an antenna and watch over the air TV and put that money towards your kids!  Being a parent involves making sacrifices for your kids, end of story.  Whether it's time, money, or foregone opportunities.

And why the hell has society evolved to a point where you have to have DirectTV to "feel normal"???  What else do you need to "feel normal"?  A Gucci shoe tree?  A personally autographed picture of Randy Mantooth?

And if people are donating their money to pay for meals only because these kids are losing their slips, and the parents aren't responsble enough to think, "You know, I haven't paid the school lunch bill in a while, maybe I ought to check on that and make sure it's Ok",  they should be PISSED.
 
2014-03-06 11:31:57 AM
We always walked home for lunch .
 
2014-03-06 11:34:12 AM
Just thought of something.

We at FARK should come up with a proper reward for this young man.

I propose we create and give to him The Mr. Rogers Good Neighbor award.
 
2014-03-06 11:34:30 AM

Splish: QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?

The issue isn't the sandwich, it's the fact that the kids are being treated differently for circumstances they can't control.

Who's being treated differently? I think the problem is that they're being treated the same and you think they should be treated differently.

Johnny's mom is broke and can't pay the bill, but he qualifies for free hot lunch. Splendid.

David's mom is scraping by but they don't qualify for the free lunch program. They can't afford the bill this month, so he gets a sandwich. Outrage!

Madison's dad is a millionaire and forgets to pay the bill, so Madison gets a cold sandwich. Outrage? Or "It won't kill her. She's lucky she's getting anything at all. Maybe this will teach them some responsibility"?


Why so blah about Madison? Madison deserves a good lunch even if her dad's forgetful.
 
2014-03-06 11:35:08 AM

Fissile: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Fissile: RDixon: When has school lunch ever been free for all?

In the 60s in elementary school it was $1.00 per month for hot lunch.

Kids that didn't pay either brought their own or ate nothing.

In the late 60s to early 70s the free or reduced price lunch was started but only for very low income families.

In high school in the 70s lunch was $1.50 per week and breakfast was free for all.

And the food was just as bad then as it is now in schools.

It's not about the food, it's about shaming small children for being poor.

You went to a pretty farked up school of people "shamed" the reduced lunch kids.

That's exactly what is happening to the kids at this school.   Kids that can pay: burgers and pizza.  Can't pay: Bowl of gruel.


I feel shamed when I'm driving my Toyota Carolla and a doctor in a Porsche pulls up next to me. Are you gonna give me money? No? Then STFU
 
2014-03-06 11:35:27 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Headso: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If I'm responsible enough to feed my kids, why shouldn't I be forced to feed strangers kids as well?

You're more than welcome to give more of your to other people's kids. You're not welcome to force me to do the same.

It might make you angry that a child is being fed on your pittance of a contribution to such a program but if you need to look at it in a selfish way children who get good nourishment today will cost you less tomorrow in other ways.

Eh, I doubt it. Many of the kids on the free lunch program at my high school ended up in and out of jail and with kids of their own that they couldn't feed by the time the were 20.


you kept track of which kids in your high school were on the free lunch program? you sound like you'd be a hit at parties.
 
2014-03-06 11:36:43 AM

ph0rk: QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?

The issue isn't the sandwich, it's the fact that the kids are being treated differently for circumstances they can't control.

They probably can't control their verbal or math ability, either. Should they all be treated the same there, too?


Because teaching and eating are the exact same thing.
 
2014-03-06 11:38:24 AM

Priapetic: And if people are donating their money to pay for meals only because these kids are losing their slips, and the parents aren't responsble enough to think, "You know, I haven't paid the school lunch bill in a while, maybe I ought to check on that and make sure it's Ok", they should be PISSED.


Or I paid $80 at the beginning of the month at roughly $2+ a meal that should last the kid about 30 meals so that should last more than a month, only to find out that the kid is spending $5 and is out of money before the end of the month.

Yeah I'm saying to purchase TV over food you got it.  If they are poor they are getting either free lunch or reduced lunch and reduced lunch costs like .75 so a month of meals is less than $30 which most people could scrap together.

 I'm saying that it's stupid to say "Turn off your TV when you lose your job" when it costs the person more than it would to just continue paying for a month or 2 before they get back on their feet.
 
2014-03-06 11:38:42 AM

Another Government Employee: At eight years old, that lesson would be lost.

He started as local as you can get. The kids next to him. He made his little area of the world better.

A lot better than you have this morning.


I'm discussing a better way of charitable giving, a more reasoned approach.  Thinking with your head to better the world.  You also underestimate what an 8 year old is capable of learning.  Both of my adult children are involved in charitable fundraising and volunteerism, as am I.  I must have done something right.

It's important to differentiate between ineffective feel good stories and funding mechanisms that address actual change.  I'm always willing to learn something new.  Are you?
 
2014-03-06 11:44:17 AM

Ker_Thwap: It's important to differentiate between ineffective feel good stories and funding mechanisms that address actual change. I'm always willing to learn something new. Are you?


Effective enough to get someone a hot full meal instead of a sandwich fruit and milk.  You have an odd definition of ineffective.
 
2014-03-06 11:45:15 AM

QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?

The issue isn't the sandwich, it's the fact that the kids are being treated differently for circumstances they can't control.

They probably can't control their verbal or math ability, either. Should they all be treated the same there, too?

Because teaching and eating are the exact same thing.


You didn't bother to specify. Not like it will matter, hot lunch or no, the kids with money to burn will blow it on coke and cheetos (and later on, they'll be driving their BMWs to McDonald's), and the free lunch program won't compare.

Presumably to follow this line of reasoning all the way down the rabbit hole, you'd be in favor of school uniforms, too? The de facto function of schools is to separate students. The fact that there is a free lunch program (at all, and that is funded) is great, but don't think for a minute that adding pizza to the program the kids on it are somehow not wearing their poverty on their sleeves. The other kids know, and not much will change that.
 
2014-03-06 11:46:22 AM

Another Government Employee: Just thought of something.

We at FARK should come up with a proper reward for this young man.

I propose we create and give to him The Mr. Rogers Good Neighbor award.


Your handle fits you.

The kid, while his intentions were good, saw a problem where there actually wasn't one and proceeded to shake down his neighbors to solve this great "injustice" that his bill was overdue. The horror. The horror.  And now should be rewarded for it.
 
2014-03-06 11:48:39 AM
Fissile:

That's exactly what is happening to the kids at this school.   Kids that can pay: burgers and pizza.  Can't pay: Bowl of gruel.

Gruel for everyone. Problem solved.
 
2014-03-06 11:48:41 AM

Ker_Thwap: Another Government Employee: At eight years old, that lesson would be lost.

He started as local as you can get. The kids next to him. He made his little area of the world better.

A lot better than you have this morning.

I'm discussing a better way of charitable giving, a more reasoned approach.  Thinking with your head to better the world.  You also underestimate what an 8 year old is capable of learning.  Both of my adult children are involved in charitable fundraising and volunteerism, as am I.  I must have done something right.

It's important to differentiate between ineffective feel good stories and funding mechanisms that address actual change.  I'm always willing to learn something new.  Are you?



The point you are missing here is the idea originated from the eight year old.  And, because how he and his parental units worked it, he got to see the fruits of his efforts directly, rather than as a third party observer.  This lesson IS important at that age, that actions DO have consequences (positive, in this case).  As he grows older and starts thinking: "Well, how did they get here?", then your methods will be more effective.
 
2014-03-06 11:48:45 AM
Yeah, the guy that made a fat Barbie doll got the hero tag too, doesn't really mean much does it.
 
2014-03-06 11:49:49 AM

Headso: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Headso: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If I'm responsible enough to feed my kids, why shouldn't I be forced to feed strangers kids as well?

You're more than welcome to give more of your to other people's kids. You're not welcome to force me to do the same.

It might make you angry that a child is being fed on your pittance of a contribution to such a program but if you need to look at it in a selfish way children who get good nourishment today will cost you less tomorrow in other ways.

Eh, I doubt it. Many of the kids on the free lunch program at my high school ended up in and out of jail and with kids of their own that they couldn't feed by the time the were 20.

you kept track of which kids in your high school were on the free lunch program? you sound like you'd be a hit at parties.


I didn't "keep track" but I do read local news, and if notice when familiar faces show up in crime stories.

Honestly, I'm not opposed to public school children getting hot, healthy and nutritious lunches. I just think if we're going to pay for it, we should also take some preventative measures to mitigate people who can't afford to feed their kids from having kids.
 
2014-03-06 11:50:25 AM

ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.


It's not Jesus. It's STUPID people, aholes, ignorant human beings. The ethereal icon has absolutely no control.
 
2014-03-06 11:52:04 AM

ThunderPelvis: No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut. Hallelujah.


Please don't assume that all people who believe in Jesus Christ, act the same way. We don't. Some of us have food pantries at our churches. Some of us help to feed the hungry, no questions asked. Some of us actually follow the Golden Rule.
 
2014-03-06 11:52:33 AM

strangeluck: But still, very awesome of the kid to do this, hopefully he never loses his desire to help others.


He will once he starts seeing the money taken out of his pay check when he begins to start a family of his own.
 
2014-03-06 11:54:07 AM

Danger Mouse: Another Government Employee: Just thought of something.

We at FARK should come up with a proper reward for this young man.

I propose we create and give to him The Mr. Rogers Good Neighbor award.

Your handle fits you.

The kid, while his intentions were good, saw a problem where there actually wasn't one and proceeded to shake down his neighbors to solve this great "injustice" that his bill was overdue. The horror. The horror.  And now should be rewarded for it.


Randian Materialist, I presume?

At eight, he ain't going to know the details.  All he knows is Johnny got treated differently than Suzy and asked why.

The fact he asked the question is a what needs to be rewarded.
 
2014-03-06 11:54:55 AM

TNel: Ker_Thwap: It's important to differentiate between ineffective feel good stories and funding mechanisms that address actual change. I'm always willing to learn something new. Are you?

Effective enough to get someone a hot full meal instead of a sandwich fruit and milk.  You have an odd definition of ineffective.


Depends what your goal is, doesn't it.  I'd rather see my poverty prevention dollars go towards micro loans in third world countries, than to worry about the temperature of an equally nutritious meal.  I'd imagine every single person reading this has a slightly different version of what they think is effective.  No one is forcing you to agree with my opinion.
 
2014-03-06 11:58:35 AM

Ker_Thwap: I'd rather see my poverty prevention dollars go towards micro loans in third world countries, than to worry about the temperature of an equally nutritious meal. I'd imagine every single person reading this has a slightly different version of what they think is effective. No one is forcing you to agree with my opinion.


Then don't give to the kids cause.  Others saw it as a good cause and gave money, he made a darn decent amount for an elementary student and probably more than his entire PTO raises in a year.

I think it's odd you are basically saying what the kid did was dumb.  You and I can argue over the justness of the cause all we want but he has raised more than probably you and I combined have ever raised for any cause.
 
2014-03-06 11:58:42 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If I'm responsible enough to feed my kids, why shouldn't I be forced to feed strangers kids as well?You're more than welcome to give more of your to other people's kids. You're not welcome to force me to do the same


And when one of your kids needs a blood transfusion or an organ from of those strangers kids and they say, "NO. We don't want to help people like you." What will your reaction be then? Remember you reap what you sow. If you reap hatred don't expect to sow love.
 
2014-03-06 11:59:22 AM

QueenMamaBee: Splish: QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?

The issue isn't the sandwich, it's the fact that the kids are being treated differently for circumstances they can't control.

Who's being treated differently? I think the problem is that they're being treated the same and you think they should be treated differently.

Johnny's mom is broke and can't pay the bill, but he qualifies for free hot lunch. Splendid.

David's mom is scraping by but they don't qualify for the free lunch program. They can't afford the bill this month, so he gets a sandwich. Outrage!

Madison's dad is a millionaire and forgets to pay the bill, so Madison gets a cold sandwich. Outrage? Or "It won't kill her. She's lucky she's getting anything at all. Maybe this will teach them some responsibility"?

Why so blah about Madison? Madison deserves a good lunch even if her dad's forgetful.


Ok, so then every student gets a full, free (to them) lunch, every day, paid for by taxpayers or generous benefactors? Fine. Same for housing and medical care, I assume? "Good" housing and medical care, I mean, not just adequate or sufficient.

But why is a sandwich not a "good lunch"? That's what I got most days, and it never occurred to me that I was deprived or malnourished.
 
2014-03-06 11:59:55 AM

Another Government Employee: Ker_Thwap: Another Government Employee: At eight years old, that lesson would be lost.


The point you are missing here is the idea originated from the eight year old.  And, because how he and his parental units worked it, he got to see the fruits of his efforts directly, rather than as a third party observer.  This lesson IS important at that age, that actions DO have consequences (positive, in this case).  As he grows older and starts thinking: "Well, how did they get here?", then your methods will be more effective.


This
 
2014-03-06 12:00:24 PM

allylloyd: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If I'm responsible enough to feed my kids, why shouldn't I be forced to feed strangers kids as well?You're more than welcome to give more of your to other people's kids. You're not welcome to force me to do the same

And when one of your kids needs a blood transfusion or an organ from of those strangers kids and they say, "NO. We don't want to help people like you." What will your reaction be then? Remember you reap what you sow. If you reap hatred don't expect to sow love.


Poor people don't donate blood regularly, or organs (unless they die in a moped crash).
 
2014-03-06 12:01:35 PM
TNel:

Or I paid $80 at the beginning of the month at roughly $2+ a meal that should last the kid about 30 meals so that should last more than a month, only to find out that the kid is spending $5 and is out of money before the end of the month.

So the correct answer to that situation is for your neighbors to donate money to pay your child's bill? 

Yeah I'm saying to purchase TV over food you got it.  If they are poor they are getting either free lunch or reduced lunch and reduced lunch costs like .75 so a month of meals is less than $30 which most people Umcould scrap together.

Then what did you mean when you wrote "I was being a bit sarcastic but I can't fault the parents if they want to spend $50 a month on TV service.  If that makes them feel "normal" and makes the kids happy when they are home then why not?"
 
2014-03-06 12:01:44 PM
School lunch sucked so bad where I went. I think I just about didn't eat lunch 5-12 grade if I didn't bring it in.
 
2014-03-06 12:03:59 PM

Another Government Employee: The point you are missing here is the idea originated from the eight year old. And, because how he and his parental units worked it, he got to see the fruits of his efforts directly, rather than as a third party observer. This lesson IS important at that age, that actions DO have consequences (positive, in this case). As he grows older and starts thinking: "Well, how did they get here?", then your methods will be more effective.


I'm not missing that point.  Yes, that is kind of sweet.  I'm just too jaded to be impressed by it.  I've read too many self congratulatory articles about how some kid did something special, only to learn that the parents did all the work, and went running to the press/media/bloggers with it to promote their own social agenda.  Occams razor tells me the parents did most the work, and thus for an adult charity, it kind of sucks.  For a child charity, daww, puppies!
 
2014-03-06 12:04:45 PM

TNel: Priapetic: And if people are donating their money to pay for meals only because these kids are losing their slips, and the parents aren't responsble enough to think, "You know, I haven't paid the school lunch bill in a while, maybe I ought to check on that and make sure it's Ok", they should be PISSED.

Or I paid $80 at the beginning of the month at roughly $2+ a meal that should last the kid about 30 meals so that should last more than a month, only to find out that the kid is spending $5 and is out of money before the end of the month.

Yeah I'm saying to purchase TV over food you got it.  If they are poor they are getting either free lunch or reduced lunch and reduced lunch costs like .75 so a month of meals is less than $30 which most people could scrap together.

 I'm saying that it's stupid to say "Turn off your TV when you lose your job" when it costs the person more than it would to just continue paying for a month or 2 before they get back on their feet.


If you were to lose your job next month and that would mean you'd have to choose between satellite tv and your children eating, you can't afford satellite tv this month either.
 
2014-03-06 12:04:52 PM

Fissile: RDixon: When has school lunch ever been free for all?

In the 60s in elementary school it was $1.00 per month for hot lunch.

Kids that didn't pay either brought their own or ate nothing.

In the late 60s to early 70s the free or reduced price lunch was started but only for very low income families.

In high school in the 70s lunch was $1.50 per week and breakfast was free for all.

And the food was just as bad then as it is now in schools.

It's not about the food, it's about shaming small children for being poor.


can we just shame the parents and/or school administrators instead, and just call it a day?

everyone gets a trophy!
 
2014-03-06 12:05:53 PM

TNel: I think it's odd you are basically saying what the kid did was dumb. You and I can argue over the justness of the cause all we want but he has raised more than probably you and I combined have ever raised for any cause.


Wrong, right, wrong.
 
2014-03-06 12:06:10 PM

Priapetic: So the correct answer to that situation is for your neighbors to donate money to pay your child's bill?

Then what did you mean when you wrote "I was being a bit sarcastic but I can't fault the parents if they want to spend $50 a month on TV service. If that makes them feel "normal" and makes the kids happy when they are home then why not?"


Correct solution is to have a better system in place for when students accounts get into the negative than handing a 5 year old a small slip of paper in the morning and hoping it doesn't get lost.

You could have read the second paragrah: "Let's say this students parents just lost their job and went on unemployment but they have a contract with DirecTV if they break that contract they have to pay $250 or they keep paying the $50 a month thinking that in 5 months they should have a job so it would be stupid to break contract and be out $250 all at one time (which they don't have so it goes straight to a collection agency screwing their credit for 6 years). "
 
2014-03-06 12:07:49 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Poor people don't donate blood regularly, or organs (unless they die in a moped crash).


Really and  you know this how? Because you talk to poor people? Do you actually know any? I do and I speak to them about it all the time. The things is MOST PEOPLE don't know what it is. And they do donate blood because they are paid to donate it. It's a way to make money.

//Don't agree with the paid blood donation.
//If people had easier ways to get ID cards, they would know that they can sign up as an organ donor very easily. I suggest everyone do it. If your organs don't go to someone, they will be used for research.
 
2014-03-06 12:11:15 PM

Rindred: As a public employee with a pension plan, I'm really looking forward to my golden retirement check for $1200/month. I'm gonna be rich, I tell you!

(State government blue collar workers get paid shiat - don't believe what right-wing media yelps about)


The problem isn't retirement pay per se, it's that (a) it should be saved to a separate account for each employee while that employee is actively working; and (b) there are ways for some people to game the system to get far more retirement income than their work history justified (setting up overtime so their max yearly income is disproportionately high,as mentioned by someone else.)

Everyone should have a retirement account, of which a certain amount is locked into lifecycle funds (you wouldn't go bust from the 2008 crash, because you would recover during the recovery) and is pretty much untouchable. The current government should have pretty much nothing to do with current retirees and their retirement, including not having to make up for underfunded pension funds from previous adminstrations.
 
2014-03-06 12:13:47 PM

ph0rk: QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?

The issue isn't the sandwich, it's the fact that the kids are being treated differently for circumstances they can't control.

They probably can't control their verbal or math ability, either. Should they all be treated the same there, too?

Because teaching and eating are the exact same thing.

You didn't bother to specify. Not like it will matter, hot lunch or no, the kids with money to burn will blow it on coke and cheetos (and later on, they'll be driving their BMWs to McDonald's), and the free lunch program won't compare.

Presumably to follow this line of reasoning all the way down the rabbit hole, you'd be in favor of school uniforms, too? The de facto function of schools is to separate students. The fact that there is a free lunch program (at all, and that is funded) is great, but don't think for a minute that adding pizza to the program the kids on it are somehow not wearing their poverty on their sleeves. The other kids know, and not much will change that.


Wow. You drew a LOT of (inaccurate) conclusions about my beliefs, there, Skippy. Nice going.
 
2014-03-06 12:16:47 PM

Fissile: SuperChuck: What's wrong with a sandwich?

Nothing, whats wrong is humiliating small children because their parents can't afford to feed them.  When these kids grow, some of them are going to realize what a raw deal they got.  Remember that a few years from now, when they're getting ready to parade your head around on the end of a pike.


I ate cold sandwiches brought from home for years in grade and high school. If I didn't bring money, or lunch, it damn sure wasn't provided nor was anyone telling me that it should have been provided. And you know what? I never felt humiliated and am currently a well adjusted and productive adult. I also don't have the entitlement complex that a lot of young adults have these days. I don't expect to get what I don't earn and neither did my parents. But somewhere in the past decade in this country that became a bad line of thought.

As FTFA, the kid did a damned good thing. He identified a problem and came up with a solution on a large scale which is incredible for a kid that age.
 
2014-03-06 12:19:08 PM

Splish: QueenMamaBee: Splish: QueenMamaBee: ph0rk: What's the issue with a cold sandwich, exactly?

The issue isn't the sandwich, it's the fact that the kids are being treated differently for circumstances they can't control.

Who's being treated differently? I think the problem is that they're being treated the same and you think they should be treated differently.

Johnny's mom is broke and can't pay the bill, but he qualifies for free hot lunch. Splendid.

David's mom is scraping by but they don't qualify for the free lunch program. They can't afford the bill this month, so he gets a sandwich. Outrage!

Madison's dad is a millionaire and forgets to pay the bill, so Madison gets a cold sandwich. Outrage? Or "It won't kill her. She's lucky she's getting anything at all. Maybe this will teach them some responsibility"?

Why so blah about Madison? Madison deserves a good lunch even if her dad's forgetful.

Ok, so then every student gets a full, free (to them) lunch, every day, paid for by taxpayers or generous benefactors? Fine. Same for housing and medical care, I assume? "Good" housing and medical care, I mean, not just adequate or sufficient.

But why is a sandwich not a "good lunch"? That's what I got most days, and it never occurred to me that I was deprived or malnourished.


My son and his classmates DO get free (to them) lunch every day paid for by taxpayers. Every single one in the school, regardless of ability to pay. I would not qualify for him to get free lunch, but the school took the community option due to the amount of poor families in the district.

And why jump to all of those other options? Can we not JUST keep the discussion on the lunch? Or do y'all just enjoy going off on your baseless assumptions and ignorant rants?
 
2014-03-06 12:19:12 PM

Ker_Thwap: I'm just too jaded to be impressed by it. I've read too many self congratulatory articles about how some kid did something special, only to learn that the parents did all the work, and went running to the press/media/bloggers with it to promote their own social agenda. Occams razor tells me the parents did most the work, and thus for an adult charity, it kind of sucks. For a child charity, daww, puppies!


I'm sure the parents did a lot of the work but if the kid started out wanting to do it whats wrong with getting help from someone that has the resources to help?  I mean even Romney said to just ask your parents for help.

Splish: If you were to lose your job next month and that would mean you'd have to choose between satellite tv and your children eating, you can't afford satellite tv this month either.


Yeah because that's exactly what happens.  Like I said up above they would get free lunches anyway.  I get pissed at the stigma that people put on poor people.  "Oh that person is on welfare but they have TV in their house, they could drop the TV"  Replace TV with Internet or any other "luxury" item you want.  Poor people need an escape from their shiatty life also.   People that have money just have it a lot easier and have the ability to look down on those that have less.
 
2014-03-06 12:22:24 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: allylloyd: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If I'm responsible enough to feed my kids, why shouldn't I be forced to feed strangers kids as well?You're more than welcome to give more of your to other people's kids. You're not welcome to force me to do the same

And when one of your kids needs a blood transfusion or an organ from of those strangers kids and they say, "NO. We don't want to help people like you." What will your reaction be then? Remember you reap what you sow. If you reap hatred don't expect to sow love.

Poor people don't donate blood regularly, or organs (unless they die in a moped crash).


Excuse me? Far from rich.... I donate blood regularly, as do most of my coworkers (Blood drive downstairs every month for the community and those of us who work here).
 
2014-03-06 12:24:14 PM

ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.


3/10
 
2014-03-06 12:24:48 PM
Mr. Breeze:

As FTFA, the kid did a damned good thing. He identified a problem and came up with a solution on a large scale which is incredible for a kid that age.

What was the problem?
 
2014-03-06 12:25:00 PM

QueenMamaBee: Excuse me? Far from rich.... I donate blood regularly, as do most of my coworkers (Blood drive downstairs every month for the community and those of us who work here).


Yeah that was a horrible line, I grew up poor and I gave blood a lot.  O positive so it was always needed.  Another person thinking poor people are the leeches of society.
 
2014-03-06 12:26:05 PM
As someone from Lansing that benefited from the free (then later on, reduced) lunch program, I say, good on this kid. It sucks having to eat a cold meal in the winter, and I'm sure there is an element of shaming/teasing going on (ha ha, Timmy has to eat the gross sandwich!). Keep in mind the "sandwich, fruit and milk" is probably turkey with some sort of cheese product slice, and a bruised apple the size of a plum. It's not terrible, but it's not great, either.
I remember being in 5th grade before I realized that no everyone got a lunch card at the beginning of the week (since most of the kids in my class did). The system does seem improved, however, because if I didn't pay the reduced fare (in high school) on Monday morning, then I didn't eat for the week. It was our responsibility to pay in advance, but we needed to pay every week. Maybe because at high school level they think you're responsible enough to do this, although given the $5 on monday could just mean I bought McDonalds for two days and coasted the other 3.
 
2014-03-06 12:26:05 PM

allylloyd: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Poor people don't donate blood regularly, or organs (unless they die in a moped crash).

Really and  you know this how? Because you talk to poor people? Do you actually know any? I do and I speak to them about it all the time. The things is MOST PEOPLE don't know what it is. And they do donate blood because they are paid to donate it. It's a way to make money.

//Don't agree with the paid blood donation.
//If people had easier ways to get ID cards, they would know that they can sign up as an organ donor very easily. I suggest everyone do it. If your organs don't go to someone, they will be used for research.


You could argue that if you're being paid for it it's not really a donation, but maybe that's getting into semantics. But the fact is that most poor people don't donate blood. Most rich people don't either. Very few people donate blood on any sort of a regular basis. Statistically, the people who donate blood are on average white, college educated, married, and above average income. It's basically the same demographic of people who breastfeed their children, except more male.
 
2014-03-06 12:32:19 PM
 
2014-03-06 12:33:53 PM

poodebunker: ThunderPelvis: Every child in America should get a full, nutritious school lunch, no strings attached.  It takes a pretty massive piece of sh*t to think otherwise, or to think that it's fair to segregate students' nutrition based on their parents' perceived or actual failings.  But...welcome to Fark.  I'm sure that at least one or two massive pieces of sh*t will be offended by my accurate characterization.

No child in the richest nation in the world should EVER go hungry, but the party of Jesus has decided that we just can't afford it, especially when there are tanks and fighter jets to build and rich people's taxes to cut.  Hallelujah.

It's not Jesus. It's STUPID people, aholes, ignorant human beings. The ethereal icon has absolutely no control.


If Jesus were alive today, he'd be a Farker.  And he would nuke 99% of those Pharisees from orbit.
 
2014-03-06 12:34:15 PM

Another Government Employee: Ker_Thwap: So, the kids parents help him set up a fundraiser to prove a political point, or at the least brought it to the attention of various bloggers and the media?  I'm unimpressed.

They're not feeding the poor, they're feeding the kids who have lazy/idiot parents who occasionally forget to send in the lunch money on time.

/My ex wife would very often "forget" to send in the lunch money, knowing that I'd cover it.  I hate scumbag parents.

Who pissed in your Wheaties this morning?

1) Kid saw a problem.
2) Kid asked: "What can I do?"
3) Parents (who might have been shocked the moral lesson actually sunk in), went: "Well, let's see."
4) Everybody is happier.

Good on ya, kid.  And whoever taught you to look out for your fellow kid.



An interesting piece is step 3.5, someone (it appears to maybe be kid's mom) has taken the time to post a thank you to every donation received.

The parents definitely deserve a round or two of drinks furnished for their work here.
 
2014-03-06 12:36:43 PM

Disaster Transport: I remember being in 5th grade before I realized that no everyone got a lunch card at the beginning of the week (since most of the kids in my class did). The system does seem improved, however, because if I didn't pay the reduced fare (in high school) on Monday morning, then I didn't eat for the week. It was our responsibility to pay in advance, but we needed to pay every week. Maybe because at high school level they think you're responsible enough to do this, although given the $5 on monday could just mean I bought McDonalds for two days and coasted the other 3.


We were giving big green tokens so it was very easy to see who got free lunches and who paid so yeah the kids weren't always the nicest people.

Splish: But the fact is that most poor people don't donate blood. Most rich people don't either. Very few people donate blood on any sort of a regular basis. Statistically, the people who donate blood are on average white, college educated, married, and above average income. It's basically the same demographic of people who breastfeed their children, except more male.


You have stats to back that up right or are you talking out your ass?  I mean you did say "Statistically" so that means you can show proof of your work because I searched really hard and found no data and everytime that I go to donate they have never asked me for my income level.
 
2014-03-06 12:38:50 PM
"Lansing, once the lunch box capital of the world has seen a rise in poverty since the school lunch program started. Many of the families receiving free lunches and are largely dependent of government aid, were once gainfully employed in one of the 6 lunchbox factories that supported much of Lansing's economy.  The free school lunch devastated the lunch box industry...."


The more you know.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=13261422
 
2014-03-06 12:41:30 PM

strobis48z4: 3.50


This is what they charge for school lunches in the Springfield District 19 schools:

STUDENT PRICE:
Elementary School - $2.25
Middle School - $2.45
High School - $2.70
ADULT PRICE:
Any adult - $3.25

Eugene 4J School District charges the students more.

Elementary School Lunch- $2.75
Middle School Lunch - $3.00
High School Lunch - $3.25
Any adult lunch - $4.00
 
2014-03-06 12:42:21 PM
Supply-Side Jesus does not approve.
 
2014-03-06 12:43:20 PM

TNel: Ker_Thwap: I'm just too jaded to be impressed by it. I've read too many self congratulatory articles about how some kid did something special, only to learn that the parents did all the work, and went running to the press/media/bloggers with it to promote their own social agenda. Occams razor tells me the parents did most the work, and thus for an adult charity, it kind of sucks. For a child charity, daww, puppies!

I'm sure the parents did a lot of the work but if the kid started out wanting to do it whats wrong with getting help from someone that has the resources to help? I mean even Romney said to just ask your parents for help.


Nothing wrong with that at all.  I just assume I'm talking with adults on these forums, not to the kid directly. Thus my advice. If you ever want to help your kid with this kind of thing, is to encourage smart efficient charitable habits, rather than feel good throwing money at something and then being surprised later that money had zero long term effect on the problem.
 
2014-03-06 12:44:03 PM
Time for the productive portion of my day, must run. It's been fun.
 
2014-03-06 12:46:24 PM

Ker_Thwap: Nothing wrong with that at all. I just assume I'm talking with adults on these forums, not to the kid directly. Thus my advice. If you ever want to help your kid with this kind of thing, is to encourage smart efficient charitable habits, rather than feel good throwing money at something and then being surprised later that money had zero long term effect on the problem.


The kid started as local with his charity as he could get, his own school.  Why does charity have to have a long term effect?  Why can't it help right here right now?
 
2014-03-06 12:46:33 PM
And thus continuing the cycle of teaching people that others will bail them out.

Good job
 
2014-03-06 12:49:42 PM

TNel: Disaster Transport: I remember being in 5th grade before I realized that no everyone got a lunch card at the beginning of the week (since most of the kids in my class did). The system does seem improved, however, because if I didn't pay the reduced fare (in high school) on Monday morning, then I didn't eat for the week. It was our responsibility to pay in advance, but we needed to pay every week. Maybe because at high school level they think you're responsible enough to do this, although given the $5 on monday could just mean I bought McDonalds for two days and coasted the other 3.

We were giving big green tokens so it was very easy to see who got free lunches and who paid so yeah the kids weren't always the nicest people.

Splish: But the fact is that most poor people don't donate blood. Most rich people don't either. Very few people donate blood on any sort of a regular basis. Statistically, the people who donate blood are on average white, college educated, married, and above average income. It's basically the same demographic of people who breastfeed their children, except more male.

You have stats to back that up right or are you talking out your ass?  I mean you did say "Statistically" so that means you can show proof of your work because I searched really hard and found no data and everytime that I go to donate they have never asked me for my income level.


You must not have searched really hard, since if you Google "Who donates blood?" you have to scroll all the way down to the top link to find that information.
 
2014-03-06 12:54:03 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: allylloyd: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: If I'm responsible enough to feed my kids, why shouldn't I be forced to feed strangers kids as well?You're more than welcome to give more of your to other people's kids. You're not welcome to force me to do the same

And when one of your kids needs a blood transfusion or an organ from of those strangers kids and they say, "NO. We don't want to help people like you." What will your reaction be then? Remember you reap what you sow. If you reap hatred don't expect to sow love.

Poor people don't donate blood regularly, or organs (unless they die in a moped crash).


I think the point was that if the time should come that you need a blood transfusion or an organ, at that time, YOU are going to be the poor person and God forbid someone be standing there saying "I'm responsible enough to take care of my organs/blood/whatever, why should I be forced to take care of yours because you didn't??"

Rich and poor isn't just about money and cash flow.
 
2014-03-06 12:55:14 PM

Splish: You must not have searched really hard, since if you Google "Who donates blood?" you have to scroll all the way down to the top link to find that information.


yeah because "According to studies, the average donor is a college-educated white male, between the ages of 30 and 50, who is married and has an above-average income. However, a broad cross-section of the population donates every day. Furthermore, these "average" statistics are changing, and women and minority groups are volunteering to donate in increasing numbers. While persons 65 years and older compose 13 percent of the population, they use 25 percent of all blood units transfused. "

With no citation and WHO and Red Cross have no information on the individual donor only the wealth of the country donating.  "Blood Donor Demographics" shows no studies and would be interested in this study which I bet was an informal survey since like I said before all of the times that I have giving blood they have never asked me  for my income levels.
 
2014-03-06 12:56:31 PM
I would have taught them to fish
 
2014-03-06 12:56:55 PM

Splish: TNel: Disaster Transport: I remember being in 5th grade before I realized that no everyone got a lunch card at the beginning of the week (since most of the kids in my class did). The system does seem improved, however, because if I didn't pay the reduced fare (in high school) on Monday morning, then I didn't eat for the week. It was our responsibility to pay in advance, but we needed to pay every week. Maybe because at high school level they think you're responsible enough to do this, although given the $5 on monday could just mean I bought McDonalds for two days and coasted the other 3.

We were giving big green tokens so it was very easy to see who got free lunches and who paid so yeah the kids weren't always the nicest people.

Splish: But the fact is that most poor people don't donate blood. Most rich people don't either. Very few people donate blood on any sort of a regular basis. Statistically, the people who donate blood are on average white, college educated, married, and above average income. It's basically the same demographic of people who breastfeed their children, except more male.

You have stats to back that up right or are you talking out your ass?  I mean you did say "Statistically" so that means you can show proof of your work because I searched really hard and found no data and everytime that I go to donate they have never asked me for my income level.

You must not have searched really hard, since if you Google "Who donates blood?" you have to scroll all the way down to the top link to find that information.


If you had searched really, really hard, you'd also see that the people most likely to donate blood are also conservative and religious.

Here was how I found this information:
Go to Google.
Search for relevant terms.
Click on any of the links.
Read them.
 
2014-03-06 12:56:57 PM

Splish: You must not have searched really hard, since if you Google "Who donates blood?" you have to scroll all the way down to the top link to find that information.


All the times that you have giving have they ever asked you how much you make?
 
2014-03-06 12:59:13 PM

Splish: If you had searched really, really hard, you'd also see that the people most likely to donate blood are also conservative and religious.


Again I have never been asked at the collection site my religious preference or what my party affliation is.  What you are seeing are polls and if you believe a poll.......
 
2014-03-06 12:59:42 PM
The school is actually in Howell, MI, not Lansing which according to a quick google search, has a 16% family poverty rate.

Good on this kid...at 8 they are finally starting to really feel empathy for other people/kids around them (based on observations of my own 8 year old and his friends). And if he pays off the tabs of some kids who's parents just forgot to pay up, well then I guess you can just hope those parents feel like jackasses and maybe contribute to this kids fund.

/CSS: I almost burst into tears when my 8 year old asked if we could pool all our money (his included) to help out his uncle and aunt who were having trouble.
//Told him no since we had already helped them out but praised the crap out of his generous thinking.
 
2014-03-06 01:01:08 PM

TNel: Splish: You must not have searched really hard, since if you Google "Who donates blood?" you have to scroll all the way down to the top link to find that information.

yeah because "According to studies, the average donor is a college-educated white male, between the ages of 30 and 50, who is married and has an above-average income. However, a broad cross-section of the population donates every day. Furthermore, these "average" statistics are changing, and women and minority groups are volunteering to donate in increasing numbers. While persons 65 years and older compose 13 percent of the population, they use 25 percent of all blood units transfused. "

With no citation and WHO and Red Cross have no information on the individual donor only the wealth of the country donating.  "Blood Donor Demographics" shows no studies and would be interested in this study which I bet was an informal survey since like I said before all of the times that I have giving blood they have never asked me  for my income levels.


Would you take the CDC? Or peer reviewed journals? More importantly, did you find any acceptable data from the WHO or Red Cross that disputes what I said or addresses it at all?
 
2014-03-06 01:03:31 PM

Splish: Would you take the CDC? Or peer reviewed journals? More importantly, did you find any acceptable data from the WHO or Red Cross that disputes what I said or addresses it at all?


Sure post the link it's not my job to backup your claims.  I read a WHO report that listed wealth of country if you have one that lists the donors themselves then please link it.
 
2014-03-06 01:13:53 PM

TNel: Splish: If you had searched really, really hard, you'd also see that the people most likely to donate blood are also conservative and religious.

Again I have never been asked at the collection site my religious preference or what my party affliation is.  What you are seeing are polls and if you believe a poll.......


No, they're studies published in peer reviewed journals. If you don't get the difference between a study and a poll, or if you think a study is invalid because you didn't individually participate in it I'm not sure what to tell you.
 
2014-03-06 01:18:43 PM

Splish: No, they're studies published in peer reviewed journals. If you don't get the difference between a study and a poll, or if you think a study is invalid because you didn't individually participate in it I'm not sure what to tell you.


Post up or shut up.
 
2014-03-06 02:35:08 PM

TNel: Splish: No, they're studies published in peer reviewed journals. If you don't get the difference between a study and a poll, or if you think a study is invalid because you didn't individually participate in it I'm not sure what to tell you.

Post up or shut up.


As a conservative type that has been known to donate blood, I have to say.

Splish, post up or shut up.
 
2014-03-06 02:39:35 PM

Tricky Chicken: As a conservative type that has been known to donate blood, I have to say.

Splish, post up or shut up.


I'll admit to being wrong if he has the studies but I'm leaning to it being a poll and I have zero faith in polls as being accurate.
 
2014-03-06 02:45:58 PM

TNel: Tricky Chicken: As a conservative type that has been known to donate blood, I have to say.

Splish, post up or shut up.

I'll admit to being wrong if he has the studies but I'm leaning to it being a poll and I have zero faith in polls as being accurate.


A quick google search brought up many many conservative pundits making the same claim and all of the ones I found seemed to refer to a single 'study' by some guy named Brooks. I gave up at that point, because nobody mentioned anything speciffic about that one particular study or its methodology.
 
2014-03-06 02:49:57 PM
$14,000/4000 meals = $3.50/lunch.  Where TF is school lunch $3.50? I paid $1.10, and I'm not *THAT* old......

/ GET OFF MY LAWN!
 
2014-03-06 02:52:29 PM

Tricky Chicken: TNel: Tricky Chicken: As a conservative type that has been known to donate blood, I have to say.

Splish, post up or shut up.

I'll admit to being wrong if he has the studies but I'm leaning to it being a poll and I have zero faith in polls as being accurate.

A quick google search brought up many many conservative pundits making the same claim and all of the ones I found seemed to refer to a single 'study' by some guy named Brooks. I gave up at that point, because nobody mentioned anything speciffic about that one particular study or its methodology.


Diving down a bit deeper, led me to the wikipage on Brooks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_C._Brooks">http://en.wikipedia.o rg/wiki/Arthur_C._Brooks

and TNel (ding ding ding ding) we have a winner!

You called it, the 'data' comes from survey results.

Also, donating to your religious corporation or "church" led to a report that 98% of church going people give to charity. Even if the church just pockets your money for helicopters and hookers.
 
2014-03-06 02:57:07 PM

HighTechHick: $14,000/4000 meals = $3.50/lunch.  Where TF is school lunch $3.50? I paid $1.10, and I'm not *THAT* old......

/ GET OFF MY LAWN!


I wonder if that includes breakfast and lunch which would make a bit more sense.
 
2014-03-06 02:59:14 PM
This all became an issue when schools contracted out to corporations for lunches.  Instead of a marginally higher food cost for free lunches, they have to pay for every lunch given out for free because they mandate the contractor feed kids even if they can't pay.

AKA, the free market at work.
 
2014-03-06 03:23:39 PM

Splish: You could argue that if you're being paid for it it's not really a donation, but maybe that's getting into semantics. But the fact is that most poor people don't donate blood. Most rich people don't either. Very few people donate blood on any sort of a regular basis. Statistically, the people who donate blood are on average white, college educated, married, and above average income. It's basically the same demographic of people who breastfeed their children, except more male.



You don't know any BLACK people, do you? Because I'm a BLACK WOMAN! So please meet some of us and know we aren't all ghetto whores. We are intelligent, we are educated, we have good jobs, some of us are married with children, some of us are divorced with children and some of us just have children. We don't want to be Oprah and we don't want to be Beyoncé. WE JUST WANT TO BE RESPECTED!
 
2014-03-06 03:45:52 PM
Ok, the demographic data other than political leaning and income level is out there, easy to find, and not much in dispute. As for the political leaning piece, that does seem to be primarily from the Arthur C. Brooks survey, and I'm not going to buy and read his book to ferret out his methods, so I'll gladly retract that claim. I can't find anything that substantively disputes it, but it's probably not very reliable either. I can't identify any specific study that deals with income level on a widespread basis in the U.S., although many major blood banks and university hospitals quote it verbatim as above. There are several studies published in major journals looking at it around the world, in Canada, India, China, Iran, Argentina, Japan, and Brazil that all find that higher socio-economic classes donate more frequently. Maybe the U.S. is uniquely different, although the racial demographic data strongly suggests it follows the exact same trend.
 
2014-03-06 04:21:52 PM

TNel: HighTechHick: $14,000/4000 meals = $3.50/lunch.  Where TF is school lunch $3.50? I paid $1.10, and I'm not *THAT* old......

/ GET OFF MY LAWN!

I wonder if that includes breakfast and lunch which would make a bit more sense.


In my area it doesn't. Springfield School District charges students $1.10 for breakfast (K-12), adults are charged $1.90. Eugene 4J charges a different price for each level. Elementary school is $1.25, middle school is $1.50 & high school is $1.75.
 
2014-03-06 04:23:45 PM

TNel: Priapetic: So the correct answer to that situation is for your neighbors to donate money to pay your child's bill?

Then what did you mean when you wrote "I was being a bit sarcastic but I can't fault the parents if they want to spend $50 a month on TV service. If that makes them feel "normal" and makes the kids happy when they are home then why not?"

Correct solution is to have a better system in place for when students accounts get into the negative than handing a 5 year old a small slip of paper in the morning and hoping it doesn't get lost.


Is there some point where the burden falls on the parent to be responsible?  Or is it up to the school system to design a process that is utterly foolproof?  The latter sounds expensive and penalizing to all the other parents who are responsible.


You could have read the second paragrah: ...

Um, I did read the second paragraph.  I assumed since you wrote both of them, they both represented your beliefs on the matter.  They are not mutually exclusive. If the first paragraph isn't what you believe, why didn't you delete it?
 
2014-03-06 04:57:20 PM

allylloyd: Splish: You could argue that if you're being paid for it it's not really a donation, but maybe that's getting into semantics. But the fact is that most poor people don't donate blood. Most rich people don't either. Very few people donate blood on any sort of a regular basis. Statistically, the people who donate blood are on average white, college educated, married, and above average income. It's basically the same demographic of people who breastfeed their children, except more male.


You don't know any BLACK people, do you? Because I'm a BLACK WOMAN! So please meet some of us and know we aren't all ghetto whores. We are intelligent, we are educated, we have good jobs, some of us are married with children, some of us are divorced with children and some of us just have children. We don't want to be Oprah and we don't want to be Beyoncé. WE JUST WANT TO BE RESPECTED!


I appear to have touched a nerve, and I'm not sure why. Whatever it was, I apologize. I didn't think I said anything that implied you (either you personally or black women as a whole) were ghetto or anything else. I was simply restating the information from the sources I found (and that I admittedly can't substantiate with hard data), and I didn't mean any of it as a personal attack.
 
2014-03-06 05:30:41 PM

allylloyd: WE JUST WANT TO BE R-E-S-P-E-C-TED


find out what it means to me

/sock it to me
 
2014-03-06 06:43:09 PM

Headso: Pick: Why aren't the parents feeding their own children? Why is it the school's responsibility?

because you suck at trolling


The first question is legit.  Especially if you want to, you know, solve the problem and not just put a band aid on it.
 
2014-03-06 07:20:47 PM

SuperChuck: What's wrong with a sandwich?


I was thinking a cold sandwich is probably healthier than "hot meal" which is probably deep fried cheese wrapped bacon or something. I remember being in school in 80s 90s 00s, if it was hot it was disgusting or deeply unhealthy.
 
2014-03-07 08:10:26 AM

Priapetic: Is there some point where the burden falls on the parent to be responsible? Or is it up to the school system to design a process that is utterly foolproof? The latter sounds expensive and penalizing to all the other parents who are responsible.


If you don't know that there is an issue how can you fix said issue?  I usually give my kid $80 at the start of the month, if he blows through this money in a week and doesn't give me the paper how would I know that he's out of money?  You are telling me that in this day and age an email or txt is unthinkable?
 
2014-03-07 09:35:37 AM

Priapetic: design a process that is utterly foolproof


lelz

you must be new to fark

welcome

/there is no such thing
 
2014-03-07 10:32:20 AM

Priapetic: Or is it up to the school system to design a process that is utterly foolproof?


Here I have a system:  Balance <= X amount - Automated phone call saying "You childs lunch balance is currently below the allowable amount and your child will now receive a sandwhich and milk until the balance is paid off.", then an email goes out saying the same thing.   I get calls and emails about attendance why should food balance be any different.
 
2014-03-07 12:00:50 PM

TNel: Priapetic: Or is it up to the school system to design a process that is utterly foolproof?

If you don't know that there is an issue how can you fix said issue?  I usually give my kid $80 at the start of the month, if he blows through this money in a week and doesn't give me the paper how would I know that he's out of money?  You are telling me that in this day and age an email or txt is unthinkable?


No, not unthinkable, but I think expecting parents to have enough involvement in and influence over their child's life that a) they are aware of what the child is doing, and b) they instill in their child enough sense of responsibility to deliver a note, is not only thinkable, but reasonable.  Why should anything else be needed.

Regardless of that, I still maintain if this whole situation were the result of clerical and information flow errors, the donators of $14,000 should be pissed, be cause I doubt that was their expectation when they donated.
 
2014-03-07 12:05:50 PM

Priapetic: No, not unthinkable, but I think expecting parents to have enough involvement in and influence over their child's life that a) they are aware of what the child is doing, and b) they instill in their child enough sense of responsibility to deliver a note, is not only thinkable, but reasonable. Why should anything else be needed.


Because you have neveer lost a small piece of paper ever in your entire life.   Whatever.  I don't even trust my wife to not loose a full page worth a small strip of paper.
 
2014-03-07 01:05:24 PM

Priapetic: Is there some point where the burden falls on the parent to be responsible?  Or is it up to the school system to design a process that is utterly foolproof?


wait i got it

the answer is Nanny 911

right? amirite??

nanny 911, help us

i liek that show cuz it comes on right before my fav. show ow my ballz :D
 
Displayed 186 of 186 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report