[NEWS] Republican bill will reduce free school lunch

[PhantOS]

i think rocket launches cost a ton of money and wouldn't be too efficient unless you were disposing of like 5 tonnes of nuclear waste

[Ad Bot]

[Alternat¡ve]

also worth mentioning that checking someone's extra financial decisions and luxuries as a school is unconstitutional. they can't say 'well you wasted this much money on netflix therefore your child wont get lunch' because they aren't legally allowed to see what you spend money on unless you directly tell them.

So you actually believe in this delusion that people that buy Spotify, Netflix, Hulu, YouTube Red, Uber, Trunk Club, HBO every month and then have no money left over for their children's lunch should actually be accepted normalized?

[King Tøny]

Phantos is passively playing the black card.

[Cappytaino]

Also, makes me laugh when politicians say "clean coal" as an alternative as if it implicitly means "clean energy".

well no coal is clean. Anthracite however is miles better than lower grade coals like lignite. It still isnt clean, but better than burning cheaper low grade coals.


Controversial opinion time: if someone can't afford a school lunch but can afford "luxuries" like Netflix or a smartphone, they have stuff spending habits and giving them a free lunch is only offering an incentive for poor spending habits to continue.

[otto-san]

to be fair, i don't think smartphones are as much a luxury any more if you already have a carrier, and getting netflix and a cell phone instead of television and a landline from a cable or satellite provider might be cheaper for some families

[Foxscotch]

Controversial opinion time: if someone can't afford a school lunch but can afford "luxuries" like Netflix or a smartphone, they have stuff spending habits and giving them a free lunch is only offering an incentive for poor spending habits to continue.

so even if u believe this, what you're saying is that you think children should be forced to go hungry for their parents' mistakes

[Red Spy]

If poor people can afford iPhones then they can afford loving school lunches

[PhantOS]

There's legally no way to ensure that families are budgeting correctly or not spending too much on stupid stuff. With that in mind, the National Free Lunch Program cannot assume that someone is wasting money on other stuff in order to reject the student's eligibility. They can only check how much the family earns and decide based on that.

Instead of netflix, some of those other 80-100k families might be spending it on other random expensive things that are necessary, like herpes cream, anti-allergy medicine, cat food, dog food, other necessary household things.

If poor people can afford iPhones then they can afford loving school lunches

Not all poor people can afford iPhones. Also that statement is loving stupid

[Insert Name Here²]

If the parents can afford to get their kids an iphone, they can afford lunches

there are a forgetton of kids in my school with iphones yet are on free lunches so lmao

[PhantOS]

You're both equally autistic and don't understand a bit about finances and budgeting

a) you have no idea how they were able to afford the iphone in the first place. a family member could've bought it for them, maybe their family gave them money, etc.

b) if that is your only criteria for who is and isn't eligible for free lunch you're both really stupid

[Red Spy]

You're both equally autistic
you're both really stupid

What an insightful comment

[PhantOS]

What an insightful comment

What other response can I give to it? You literally just said 'if poor people can afford iphones they can afford school lunches"

since when do all 100% of poor people in this country own iphones? should we just take away free lunches for people who own iphones? what are you even trying to say here?

of course people could use that same 300$ that they spent on an iphone for school lunch for their kids, but how can you constitutionally enforce this new law that you're proposing? will the millions of poor kids who don't own iphones now starve because of a couple thousand who do?

[Cappytaino]

so even if u believe this, what you're saying is that you think children should be forced to go hungry for their parents' mistakes

Of course children shouldn't be punished for their parent's mistakes. But there has to be a better way to make sure kids aren't going hungry while at the same time not putting the burden on the taxpayers for their parents' poor habits.

Then you're just punishing everybody in the cases where people are on the program that don't really need it.

[Red Spy]

since when do all 100% of poor people in this country own iphones?

Ok when the forget did I say all

[PhantOS]

Ok when the forget did I say all

ok, how many poor people then?

Of course children shouldn't be punished for their parent's mistakes. But there has to be a better way to make sure kids aren't going hungry while at the same time not putting the burden on the taxpayers for their parents' poor habits.

burden is a bit of an overstatement

the only way to enforce this issue is to either shorten the scope of the free lunch program, which will result in millions of families who legitimately cannot afford to dish out lunch money for children to lose the free lunch option, or check the families expenses, which would be entirely unconstitutional.