You wrote starving. Starving means too few calories. In our rich, peaceful country even the poorest who don’t work are fat. They have easy access to calorie dense food.
Definitions matter. The usda definition of food insecurity isn’t lack of food, it is not eating the right foods. You supported what I stated. Poor people eat like shit. They also make other poor choices which is why they are poor and typically in poor health. How many poor people are in your circle out there in the burbs?
You're so wrapped up in your political view you actually are hung up on whether these kids are *literally* starving or not, to the point that you bring up the definition of the word, when talking about making sure kids don't have to sit through a 7 hour day at school hungry because they're too poor to get food that day.
Why the hell do you care if that kid needs food because he's on deaths doorstep or because a kid ran out of lunch money on Wednesday, and mom doesn't get paid til Friday?
I'd definitely argue that you're so in a bubble you can't see reality either.
Probably less than that. 140k students, and only about 70% pay normal price, as 30% are on free and reduced lunch.
Normal price is only $2 a day if every student eats lunch and breakfast, as much of the meal is already subsidized federally.
140k students * 70% * $2 *180 days is about 35 million. With 800k adults, it's $44 each.
An objectively good thing that materially improves the lives of the people it affects.
Let's see what obscure reasons the bad-faith trolls will come up with to argue against it lol
I mean I don't know that it's all that obscure. The argument seems to boil down to "I don't know I guess kids should probably eat" "yeah but counterpoint fuck them kids"
They will say those kids should pull themselves up by their bootstraps because they had to pay for their school lunches. Or they will say they don't have kids in school, so why should they have to pay? The second one is literally an argument I'm having on our local nextdoor with someone that's pissed they might have to pay 70 a year more for schools
I had to ask them if they went to school, they wanted to know why I asked such a ridiculous question lol I just said no reason. They also call it "socialism" like your free education is a bad thing...😆 gotta love sussex County!
Fuck them kids? Are you serious? Kids are heavenly products that can do no wrong no matter what. Especially, you know, the ~~whi~~ good ones.
Poor people, however? Fuck them poor people, no matter how old they are, even poor kindergarteners.
/s since there are people here who will unironically agree with me
It's part of the scheme to destroy the nuclear family and indoctrinate state worship. Socialist feeding schemes start off well intentioned but end up causing famines. Hitler got his start raising funds to give milk to poor german kids. TANSTAFL. How'd I do?
I'd like to to also see school gardens with integrated science, business and home-ec curriculum built in to the mix. Kids could be "growing food they sell" to the cafeteria.
Also, given the legal precedent that you lose all rights when you walk into the school, they take over the role as your guardian, can censor your speech, search you without cause, etc, one would argue that since there is no obligation for a child to pay a full time guardian for their meals, there also should be no obligation for a child under temporary guardianship to pay for their meals, especially given the fact that school is "mandated" (loosely used but homeschooling or private isn't an option for those that need free lunch) up to a certain age.
I'll be honest that really feels like overcomplicating it. If I'm sitting on my front step and some random kid comes roller skating by and trips over something and faceplant hard no kind of technical calculations enter my head. I am an adult, that is a child, I have a duty to and a responsibility of the welfare of that child. Questions that do not matter at that time include, is this kid from the right neighborhood? Do the parents of this child make above or below a certain income? Some other bull shit. Questions that do matter include, is anything broken? Do you need to wash your face? Do you need me to contact your parents for you or help you home? That's it that's the only questions that should really be going through your head in that moment.
Cape Henlopens last home ec teacher retired in 2004(bonus points if you can name her, she was there for about 35 years), and she was replaced by the culinary program which is entirely optional for students if it's not their pathway.
I feel like that's a microcosm of American high schools. About 20 years ago we just gave up on the class that taught you basic life skills like how to balance a bank account and pay taxes, sew a button or hem a pair of pants, cook a meal for yourself or a family.
All replaced by a throwaway culture expecting you to get rid of pants that don't fit and buy new ones, and eat out every night because you don't know how to cook. And now high school is just rote memorization and taking a pathway where the teacher likes you and you can get away with doing as little work as possible, leaving these kids 1000% unprepared for the real world unless they sought out real world experience on their own during high school. Because why be prepared for the real world when we are just sending you to 13th grade at whatever college you choose?
I wish we there was funding to pay farmers to grow fruits and vegetables for school meals. Seems like it would be a win/win. Maybe we need giant greenhouses for winter vegetables too.
> I wish we there was funding to pay farmers to grow fruits and vegetables for school meals.
All 19 school districts buy produce from Delaware farmers already.
If I remember my stat correctly, most Delaware ag production is consumed within 200 miles of where it's grown. Chicken might be the only commodity that gets a bit more geographic stretch on it but most of what is produced generally is consumed in the Mid-Atlantic.
Worth a discussion but i wonder why free breakfast and lunch is the bare minimum. Plenty of kids of parents who make 200k+ a year. Why should people who pay taxes pay for their kids breakfast?
Oh, I agree. I would love more support for community based programs but you have to set a starting point in order to progress. It absolutely shouldn't be the bare minimum.
Because if we make it free for everyone, nobody ever has to deal with the lunch money hassle ever again, poor families save a bunch (comparitively) and everyone in the entire state to pay for every single kid to eat breakfast and lunch (spoiler: they dont) will cost each tax paying delaware citizen (not including outside residents that work and pay taxes in delaware) a whopping extra *forty four dollars* on their taxes.
If you make more than 200k a year and you're worried about that extra $44 in taxes, you can fuck right off. Tell your stay at home wife to cut Starbucks out for a week and you can afford it.
Why should someone who makes 30k a year pay more taxes to feed kids whose parents make so much more than they do? Seems unfair to me, taking money from the poor and giving to the wealthy.
Because when we mandate that children should be in school, be it public, private or home, we place a burden on both the child and the parent. The very least we can do is feed them while we keep them confined. When we force families to comply we carry the obligation to care for them while they do so.
So poor people and all people should pay more taxes because school is forced child confinement? I'm open to arguments for why government provided food and higher taxes is good for society, but your explanation doesn't make much sense. You're saying school is a mandated burden that confines children, but also home schoolers should get delivered government meals as well?
You're so close, my friend. Yes. Yes to all of that. Why? Because we recognize that an educated society is better for everyone than an uneducated society. And that fed children learn more. Families become more stable with food security. Neighborhoods become better from stable families. Educated workers are more productive and earn more than under-educated workers. It's a system that encourages everyone to help one another so that we all get ahead.
Instead of saying "Why should I help someone else?" you should be asking "What can i do to make it so others don't need help?"
You're acting too afraid of building a bountiful society because you don't want to help an abstract someone you don't even know. In the meantime real, live children, their families, the neighborhoods around those families, and the rest of society show tangible results of feeding kids while they're in school.
It's your resistance that doesn't make sense.
I don't think it's appropriate to charge seniors or people who are on fixed incomes higher taxes to feed doctor's and lawyers kids. That's all there is to it.
I support this 100%. We need more socialism in our society. Feel free to down vote me if you will, but I am tired of austerity for the poor and working classes.
Ideally, it should be funded for the people who otherwise could not afford. But also ideally, the technicians who draw our blood and start our IVs should use gloves to avoid blood borne infections. Most of us do not risk the phelbotomists, so a lot of gloves are technically wasted. However since we don't have a quick way of differentiating who needs protection and who does not, we correctly default to universal precautions and protect everyone irrespective of actual need. Systems and processes just work better when applied to everybody.
If there are students whose only reliable meal is what the school cafeteria serves, and there are, so it should be subsidized. If subsidizing it for all students is the best assurance to avoid denying it to the needy, then that's the way to go. Much like medical universal precautions or TSA screening which are applied to everyone to avoid having to identify a few.
Oh man you're one of those cool people that make quick witty comments. I'm so honored you chose my reply to reply to! And now I get to reply to your reply of my reply!!! Made my week, thanks friend!
I mean I can only work with what I am given. And while your statement that governments raise money through taxation and then spend it on various things is factual, it is rather devoid of a position on much of anything. It's not far off from interjecting into this conversation that leaves are green due to chlorophyll, factual but I have trouble grasping the relevance.
This is good. If they can find a way to make it budget neutral by either using the revenue for legal Marijuana or cut a useless over reach program it would awesome.
The new free meals is making kids throw up, school lunche is the worse it has ever been… kids are getting sick right after lunch it’s happening all over NCC
Making school breakfasts and lunches free to all students eliminates the stigma that comes with free lunches and reduced price lunches for some. Hear, hear!
But I think we need to take this a step further, and make it possible for students to obtain breakfasts and lunches during the summer. Their need does not go down during the summer. I don't know what the logistical issues might be.
Somewhere -- likely not a Delaware story -- I've read of schools that fill a backpack with healthy snackbars and the like each Friday, so that if meals are not available on a predictable basis, the student can have the reassurance that they will not go hungry over the weekend, no matter what is going on with their parents. (And maybe they have something they can offer to a hungry friend.) Not the way we wish it was, but clearly the village doing its part to make sure children don't go hungry.
Nobody should ever be starving in our country, let alone our State
>>Nobody should ever be starving in our **planet**, let alone our hemisphere. FTFY
In our galaxy, let alone our solar system
Nobody should be homeless either.
Poor people in our country have higher rates of obesity. When the poorest are the fattest that’s a good indication that lack food is not an issue.
A lack of nutritious food
You wrote starving. Starving means too few calories. In our rich, peaceful country even the poorest who don’t work are fat. They have easy access to calorie dense food.
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/ag-and-food-statistics-charting-the-essentials/food-security-and-nutrition-assistance/#:~:text=Food%20insecurity%20rates%20are%20highest,and%20very%20low%20food%20security.
Definitions matter. The usda definition of food insecurity isn’t lack of food, it is not eating the right foods. You supported what I stated. Poor people eat like shit. They also make other poor choices which is why they are poor and typically in poor health. How many poor people are in your circle out there in the burbs?
Say you hate poor people without saying you hate poor people.
You’re either trolling or so far in a bubble you can’t see reality.
You're so wrapped up in your political view you actually are hung up on whether these kids are *literally* starving or not, to the point that you bring up the definition of the word, when talking about making sure kids don't have to sit through a 7 hour day at school hungry because they're too poor to get food that day. Why the hell do you care if that kid needs food because he's on deaths doorstep or because a kid ran out of lunch money on Wednesday, and mom doesn't get paid til Friday? I'd definitely argue that you're so in a bubble you can't see reality either.
He doesn't even live in the state anymore, so none of this affects him.
How dare you think so logically and humanely.
Bill sounds like a really generous guy.
Yeah but he is a dick when in Florida.
I don't know anyone who goes on vacation to Florida and acts very nice to anyone else.
When it is Jersey Week at WDW, the clientele are nicer.
Do you know many people that vacation in Florida?
My parents are people enough, I'll tell you...
I’d gladly pay a couple hundred extra bucks a year in taxes to make sure every child gets lunch everyday.
Probably less than that. 140k students, and only about 70% pay normal price, as 30% are on free and reduced lunch. Normal price is only $2 a day if every student eats lunch and breakfast, as much of the meal is already subsidized federally. 140k students * 70% * $2 *180 days is about 35 million. With 800k adults, it's $44 each.
didn’t the state have a surplus last year? It might not have to cost us anything
What’s stopping you. Write the check.
An objectively good thing that materially improves the lives of the people it affects. Let's see what obscure reasons the bad-faith trolls will come up with to argue against it lol
I mean I don't know that it's all that obscure. The argument seems to boil down to "I don't know I guess kids should probably eat" "yeah but counterpoint fuck them kids"
They will say those kids should pull themselves up by their bootstraps because they had to pay for their school lunches. Or they will say they don't have kids in school, so why should they have to pay? The second one is literally an argument I'm having on our local nextdoor with someone that's pissed they might have to pay 70 a year more for schools
So boils down to what I said you know fuck them kids. Best thing to do in that scenario is just to call him a moral degenerate and a shirker.
I had to ask them if they went to school, they wanted to know why I asked such a ridiculous question lol I just said no reason. They also call it "socialism" like your free education is a bad thing...😆 gotta love sussex County!
Fuck them kids? Are you serious? Kids are heavenly products that can do no wrong no matter what. Especially, you know, the ~~whi~~ good ones. Poor people, however? Fuck them poor people, no matter how old they are, even poor kindergarteners. /s since there are people here who will unironically agree with me
It's part of the scheme to destroy the nuclear family and indoctrinate state worship. Socialist feeding schemes start off well intentioned but end up causing famines. Hitler got his start raising funds to give milk to poor german kids. TANSTAFL. How'd I do?
Nailed the fascism
I'd like to to also see school gardens with integrated science, business and home-ec curriculum built in to the mix. Kids could be "growing food they sell" to the cafeteria.
Or we could just give kids food. Cuz it's not a kid's job to figure out where their next meal is coming from. It's adults responsibility to do that.
they're still getting free lunch. the school farm idea is just an educational tool that would prove beneficial for all.
Also, given the legal precedent that you lose all rights when you walk into the school, they take over the role as your guardian, can censor your speech, search you without cause, etc, one would argue that since there is no obligation for a child to pay a full time guardian for their meals, there also should be no obligation for a child under temporary guardianship to pay for their meals, especially given the fact that school is "mandated" (loosely used but homeschooling or private isn't an option for those that need free lunch) up to a certain age.
I'll be honest that really feels like overcomplicating it. If I'm sitting on my front step and some random kid comes roller skating by and trips over something and faceplant hard no kind of technical calculations enter my head. I am an adult, that is a child, I have a duty to and a responsibility of the welfare of that child. Questions that do not matter at that time include, is this kid from the right neighborhood? Do the parents of this child make above or below a certain income? Some other bull shit. Questions that do matter include, is anything broken? Do you need to wash your face? Do you need me to contact your parents for you or help you home? That's it that's the only questions that should really be going through your head in that moment.
Cape Henlopens last home ec teacher retired in 2004(bonus points if you can name her, she was there for about 35 years), and she was replaced by the culinary program which is entirely optional for students if it's not their pathway. I feel like that's a microcosm of American high schools. About 20 years ago we just gave up on the class that taught you basic life skills like how to balance a bank account and pay taxes, sew a button or hem a pair of pants, cook a meal for yourself or a family. All replaced by a throwaway culture expecting you to get rid of pants that don't fit and buy new ones, and eat out every night because you don't know how to cook. And now high school is just rote memorization and taking a pathway where the teacher likes you and you can get away with doing as little work as possible, leaving these kids 1000% unprepared for the real world unless they sought out real world experience on their own during high school. Because why be prepared for the real world when we are just sending you to 13th grade at whatever college you choose?
Yes yes YES! THIS is what I want my tax money going towards! Take care of the kids ffs!
Good!
I wish we there was funding to pay farmers to grow fruits and vegetables for school meals. Seems like it would be a win/win. Maybe we need giant greenhouses for winter vegetables too.
> I wish we there was funding to pay farmers to grow fruits and vegetables for school meals. All 19 school districts buy produce from Delaware farmers already. If I remember my stat correctly, most Delaware ag production is consumed within 200 miles of where it's grown. Chicken might be the only commodity that gets a bit more geographic stretch on it but most of what is produced generally is consumed in the Mid-Atlantic.
I mean they already do. Where do you think they get the food from?
That's a big brain idea right there. I'm all for it.
Should absolutely be the bare minimum we do as a society. There needs to be guardrails.
Worth a discussion but i wonder why free breakfast and lunch is the bare minimum. Plenty of kids of parents who make 200k+ a year. Why should people who pay taxes pay for their kids breakfast?
To remove the stigma associated with means testing. Tax that rich parent more and the fairness problem is solved.
Oh, I agree. I would love more support for community based programs but you have to set a starting point in order to progress. It absolutely shouldn't be the bare minimum.
Because it's every adult's job to take care of children. The amount that their parents make has no bearing on every adult's responsibility.
There's shitty parents that make 200k a year and don't get their kids breakfast in the morning.
Because if we make it free for everyone, nobody ever has to deal with the lunch money hassle ever again, poor families save a bunch (comparitively) and everyone in the entire state to pay for every single kid to eat breakfast and lunch (spoiler: they dont) will cost each tax paying delaware citizen (not including outside residents that work and pay taxes in delaware) a whopping extra *forty four dollars* on their taxes. If you make more than 200k a year and you're worried about that extra $44 in taxes, you can fuck right off. Tell your stay at home wife to cut Starbucks out for a week and you can afford it.
Why should someone who makes 30k a year pay more taxes to feed kids whose parents make so much more than they do? Seems unfair to me, taking money from the poor and giving to the wealthy.
Because when we mandate that children should be in school, be it public, private or home, we place a burden on both the child and the parent. The very least we can do is feed them while we keep them confined. When we force families to comply we carry the obligation to care for them while they do so.
So poor people and all people should pay more taxes because school is forced child confinement? I'm open to arguments for why government provided food and higher taxes is good for society, but your explanation doesn't make much sense. You're saying school is a mandated burden that confines children, but also home schoolers should get delivered government meals as well?
You're so close, my friend. Yes. Yes to all of that. Why? Because we recognize that an educated society is better for everyone than an uneducated society. And that fed children learn more. Families become more stable with food security. Neighborhoods become better from stable families. Educated workers are more productive and earn more than under-educated workers. It's a system that encourages everyone to help one another so that we all get ahead. Instead of saying "Why should I help someone else?" you should be asking "What can i do to make it so others don't need help?" You're acting too afraid of building a bountiful society because you don't want to help an abstract someone you don't even know. In the meantime real, live children, their families, the neighborhoods around those families, and the rest of society show tangible results of feeding kids while they're in school. It's your resistance that doesn't make sense.
I don't think it's appropriate to charge seniors or people who are on fixed incomes higher taxes to feed doctor's and lawyers kids. That's all there is to it.
I support this 100%. We need more socialism in our society. Feel free to down vote me if you will, but I am tired of austerity for the poor and working classes.
As it always should have been…
Colonial already does this, right?
About time.
Ideally, it should be funded for the people who otherwise could not afford. But also ideally, the technicians who draw our blood and start our IVs should use gloves to avoid blood borne infections. Most of us do not risk the phelbotomists, so a lot of gloves are technically wasted. However since we don't have a quick way of differentiating who needs protection and who does not, we correctly default to universal precautions and protect everyone irrespective of actual need. Systems and processes just work better when applied to everybody. If there are students whose only reliable meal is what the school cafeteria serves, and there are, so it should be subsidized. If subsidizing it for all students is the best assurance to avoid denying it to the needy, then that's the way to go. Much like medical universal precautions or TSA screening which are applied to everyone to avoid having to identify a few.
IIRC in BSD all elementary students already are offered breakfast and lunch at no cost.
This is not true for Brandywine school district
Perhaps it was during Pandemic rules?
Yes, during the pandemic all students were offered free lunch.
During the pandemic the federal government was funding school lunches for every student.
With money from our taxes. So we were funding it.
Congratulations you have successfully figured out how governments work. What's your point?
Oh man you're one of those cool people that make quick witty comments. I'm so honored you chose my reply to reply to! And now I get to reply to your reply of my reply!!! Made my week, thanks friend!
Your welcome I try my best to help the little people.
I mean you tried. Your best, meh.
I mean I can only work with what I am given. And while your statement that governments raise money through taxation and then spend it on various things is factual, it is rather devoid of a position on much of anything. It's not far off from interjecting into this conversation that leaves are green due to chlorophyll, factual but I have trouble grasping the relevance.
And yet we still got stimulus checks because the state ran a surplus, to the tune of about 6x what it would cost for the program mentioned in the OP.
They said the federal government was doing the food. It was nice to see them give some of our money back. Wish they would just do it more often
This is good. If they can find a way to make it budget neutral by either using the revenue for legal Marijuana or cut a useless over reach program it would awesome.
Or just ya know, use taxes that we pay.
Which we have a pretty sizeable surplus
Who is Bill?
Great fuckin guy
The new free meals is making kids throw up, school lunche is the worse it has ever been… kids are getting sick right after lunch it’s happening all over NCC
I'm going to need a source.
I have multiple family’s members as well as my gf who works in a school, and I have small children. I get all the info.
"Trust me, I know a guy."
Your poor spelling and grammar make me question if you have spent a significant amount of time in any school. Plus I call bullshit on your claims.
Okay 👌🏾 what do you know about public schools in the city of Wilmington?
Bet it’s not.
Making school breakfasts and lunches free to all students eliminates the stigma that comes with free lunches and reduced price lunches for some. Hear, hear! But I think we need to take this a step further, and make it possible for students to obtain breakfasts and lunches during the summer. Their need does not go down during the summer. I don't know what the logistical issues might be. Somewhere -- likely not a Delaware story -- I've read of schools that fill a backpack with healthy snackbars and the like each Friday, so that if meals are not available on a predictable basis, the student can have the reassurance that they will not go hungry over the weekend, no matter what is going on with their parents. (And maybe they have something they can offer to a hungry friend.) Not the way we wish it was, but clearly the village doing its part to make sure children don't go hungry.