“Yes I can understand kids going hungry, but is that really the problem of the school district, is that the problem of the state of North Dakota? It’s really the problem of parents being negligent with their kids,” Senator Mike Wobbema said during the March 27 vote. Wobbema was one of the senators who voted in favor of boosting reimbursements for state workers like himself.
I just can’t with these awful assholes. Our governor (MN) just approved free school lunches and even though we can afford lunch, I’m so grateful children in my state won’t be hungry. School lunch gets expensive. I’ve probably spent $400 this year for 2 kids and they don’t even eat breakfast at school nor do they eat school lunch every day. Feeding children 2 meals a day should be the minimum that we can do.
Food for me but not for thee. The assholes have to punish the kids because they perceive their parents to be lazy moochers of state funds. Also, the cruelty is the point.
Food for me but not for thee. The assholes have to punish the kids because they perceive their parents to be lazy moochers of state funds. Also, the cruelty is the point.
It’s also alarming how quickly the conservative narrative has shifted from (historically, but still as recently as the last decade) protecting benefits for children REGARDLESS of policymaker opinions about their parents - and in many cases still creating policy to punish parents they perceive as inferior - to just flat out cutting kids off because it should be the “parents responsibility.” The latter is increasingly less fringe.
This seems like a good place to get this off my chest. It’s a very @@ heavy story @@
I worked at my kids school as a playground and lunchroom supervisor. It’s a Title I school and we had a ton of kids from recent immigrant families and low income students. We had free breakfast for everyone but not lunch. Which is BS anyway.
Our lunch lady used to tell kids, “tell your mom she owes me $XX” and she would also write it down and hand it to them on a card.
A lot of kids refused to come in and get a lunch because they knew their accounts were overdue and their parents didn’t have the money to pay the balance.
So I questioned her about why the kids need to be burdened with knowing that their accounts were overdue. She was completely uncaring with her response to me. So I went to the principal (who was terrible and eventually fired) and nothing changed.
One day lunch lady went on and on in the staff room about how much this one (single) dad owed her and that the kids still come every day and get a lunch. She mentioned that his kids were in the school daycare so she knows he has money because school daycare is expensive. So I spoke up and said that if I had to choose between the 2 bills I would pay the daycare bill because I need to know my kids are care for while I work.
Anyway, I finally took it to the superintendent and asked why those little cards can’t be sealed in an envelope and mailed to parents. Turns out lunch lady was making the cards herself and the actual policy is feed the kids and take payment from anyone who pays and at the end of the year they just write off negative balances.
I have never seen someone so hell bent on being an absolute snatch to hungry kids.
I will never understand why people elected to public office forget that their role is to serve the fucking people. You do not take food from kids. You do not blame parents when THE LAWS YOU HELPED PUT INTO PLACE ARE WHAT IS PREVENTING ACCESS TO FOOD. Assholes.
"Hello babies. Welcome to Earth. It's hot in the summer and cold in the winter. It's round and wet and crowded. On the outside, babies, you've got a hundred years here. There's only one rule that I know of, babies-"God damn it, you've got to be kind.”
It may be important to POINT OUT (really, I think we should scream it far and wide) that food security policy & legislation was fundamentally started (and remains) a financial benefit for the agricultural industry. Yes, the farmers. It puts money in the pocket of the agricultural industry and greater food industry in general who grows and provides the food.
By qualifying families without the funds to pay food costs anyway, the federal government *by design* flushes the economy with dollars that PAY THE FARMERS for the food they already grew/produced instead of letting it either go to waste or force market trends to produce less. It makes food production cost less and remain more robust for the rest of us, too.
What department of the U.S. Federal government fully funds SNAP benefits & 1/2 of the administration costs? The U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Yes, these are anti-hunger programs but easily available data (2022) shows about $105 Billion, or 94% of SNAP benefits went directly to benefits that households USED TO PURCHASE FOOD.
When a school community does not fund programs that feed children, you have hungry children AND YOU DON’T PAY YOUR FARMERS FOR THE FOOD THEY PRODUCED AND BROUGHT TO MARKET.
These legislators aren’t simply punishing children to force parents to pay food costs because the parents simply DO NOT have the dollars to pay the food costs. They are creating hungry children AND stripping the economy of agricultural dollars to pay working farmers and the food industry.
Do you think that benefits the economy? US business investment? Aaaaaalll the things you prostrate yourself for, stupid?
Here's a quote from a Republican (who grew up relying on food stamps): “What we are talking about here is prioritizing these resources to make sure that our kids, in the K-12 system across the state of Maine, are being fed,” said Pouliot, the assistant minority leader in the Maine Senate. “We invest $3 billion a year in public education in this state, between state and federal resources, and if kids are hungry, they can’t bring their best mind to that educational experience. So I hope my colleagues will see this is a wise investment with a significant return.”
Post by maudefindlay on Apr 17, 2023 19:15:47 GMT -5
No abortions, protect the kids. Ban books, protect the kids. Arm teachers, protect the kids. Let me approve all curriculum, protect the kids. Free/low cost meals....now that is a step too far.
I was a free/reduced lunch kid (sometimes we qualified for free and sometimes reduced). When I was in high school and we didn't qualify, I would buy a $1 brownie for lunch. I NEVER told my parents; kids who grow up without money learn to make choices that they never should have to make. It was shaming enough to have to publicly be a reduced lunch kid; but at least I had lunch.
How many of them are using this to grift like the TN guy did?
I don't know which asshole in particular you're referring to, but I'm assuming they all grift.
I honestly don't think these gov't food rates are out of line, so it's not the increase itself I'm upset about. It's the fuck you poor kids that's utterly despicable.
How many of them are using this to grift like the TN guy did?
I don't know which asshole in particular you're referring to, but I'm assuming they all grift.
I honestly don't think these gov't food rates are out of line, so it's not the increase itself I'm upset about. It's the fuck you poor kids that's utterly despicable.
One of the guys in TN who voted to expel the 2 Congressmen doesn’t live in the district he represents and lives in Nashville itself, but still takes the travel per diem.