School Lunch Headed for Repeal

[Clip-Clop]

As athletes in my school district growing up (borderline poverty for most in my school BTW), we were fed very differently than the other students meal plans. There was science behind it and it was good.
No one is being critical of the First Lady's initiative to prevent fat kids, it is making broad, general sweeping regulations that do not take any individuality into account. Better food, sure that's a great idea, no one will argue it. Mandating the total amount of calories anyone can eat, that is too simple.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

As athletes in my school district growing up (borderline poverty for most in my school BTW), we were fed very differently than the other students meal plans. There was science behind it and it was good.
No one is being critical of the First Lady's initiative to prevent fat kids, it is making broad, general sweeping regulations that do not take any individuality into account. Better food, sure that's a great idea, no one will argue it. Mandating the total amount of calories anyone can eat, that is too simple.

if schools wanted to help, they'd have recess. we used to have that. then, it would also help if people didn't feed their kids junk, and let them sit and play xbox all night.

[GenuineRisk]

This article is a piece of sh*t (oh, it's HuffPo. How surprising). The football player's lunch isn't limited to 850 calories; the lunch the school provides is. He can eat as much as he wants, and he can eat as much crap as he wants; he just has to pack it himself. Jesus Christ on a pogo stick; no one is forcing him to buy the school lunch. The only kids getting "deprived" of corn dogs and chicken nuggets are the ones too poor to buy their own lunch. And if the government is providing the food, free of charge, to the kids, I would hope the government would try to regulate WHAT IT IS PROVIDING FOR FREE to make sure the food is marginally healthy.

No one is forcing these kids to eat, or not eat, anything. The ones getting something for free are the only ones affected, as they don't have a choice about what to eat for lunch. And, unfortunately, when you are poor, you don't get to have many choices. But at least the kids are getting fed.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

This article is a piece of sh*t (oh, it's HuffPo. How surprising). The football player's lunch isn't limited to 850 calories; the lunch the school provides is. He can eat as much as he wants, and he can eat as much crap as he wants; he just has to pack it himself. Jesus Christ on a pogo stick; no one is forcing him to buy the school lunch. The only kids getting "deprived" of corn dogs and chicken nuggets are the ones too poor to buy their own lunch. And if the government is providing the food, free of charge, to the kids, I would hope the government would try to regulate WHAT IT IS PROVIDING FOR FREE to make sure the food is marginally healthy.

No one is forcing these kids to eat, or not eat, anything. The ones getting something for free are the only ones affected, as they don't have a choice about what to eat for lunch. And, unfortunately, when you are poor, you don't get to have many choices. But at least the kids are getting fed.

What if he is a poor football player?

[Danzig]

while watching the daily show (dvr'd from a few days ago) i was reminded of this thread. as they showed, many are for the usda being able to dictate what foods can be bought with food stamps.
and then the same people arguing for that are generally the ones arguing against the usda being able to set nutritional limits on school lunch. a dichotomy for sure.
it also showed that a school with a lunch program like the one referenced here allows kids to get seconds on fruits and veggies. the daily show also showed that kids throw away part or all of their lunches-so whose fault is it if a child 'goes hungry'?

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Danzig

while watching the daily show (dvr'd from a few days ago) i was reminded of this thread. as they showed, many are for the usda being able to dictate what foods can be bought with food stamps.
and then the same people arguing for that are generally the ones arguing against the usda being able to set nutritional limits on school lunch. a dichotomy for sure.
it also showed that a school with a lunch program like the one referenced here allows kids to get seconds on fruits and veggies. the daily show also showed that kids throw away part or all of their lunches-so whose fault is it if a child 'goes hungry'?

Thought I was the only daily show viewer...

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

as they showed, many are for the usda being able to dictate what foods can be bought with food stamps.
and then the same people arguing for that are generally the ones arguing against the usda being able to set nutritional limits on school lunch. a dichotomy for sure.
it also showed that a school with a lunch program like the one referenced here allows kids to get seconds on fruits and veggies. the daily show also showed that kids throw away part or all of their lunches-so whose fault is it if a child 'goes hungry'?

LOL - good point. Oh, reality! That dang Jon Stewart!

Actually, you get a pretty fair assessment of what's politically hot and not by watching TDS. And he does have the best authors.

Someone mentioned that the football player can get multiple meals and eat all the junk he wants.

Shut up, you fat homebody moron. You know nothing about athletics and nutrition.

Just f.uck off. You're a sh.it poster and always have been.

[Calzone Lord]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

The only kids getting "deprived" of corn dogs and chicken nuggets are the ones too poor to buy their own lunch.

Or the ones too lazy to pack their own lunch.

'Sup me.

[Crown@club]

The hits keep on coming.

http://blog.heartland.org/2012/10/mi...ildren-hungry/

Also, isn't ironic that cost is up on healthier foods.

“Now [lunch] is worse-tasting, smaller-sized and higher-priced,” a Wisconsin high school senior told the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, echoing some of the problems of government these days. Hungry Minnesota students are “scavenging the lunchrooms after lunch,” and Kansas students are bringing lunch to school in droves and angrily writing state representatives.

Leftists are all about social activism for the schoolyard, but it’s not likely they’ll appreciate this rebellion.

The new rules have also instigated waves of parental protests since 2011, when school districts first began implementing mandated cost increases and ingredient rationing. The families who do pay for school lunches balked at paying more for menus that are ill-suited to individual needs and depend on subsidy increases neither states nor the federal government can afford..