• Refurbished Refurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Because once we start doing socialism for kids, people will start asking for socialism for everyone, and the ultra rich wants to keep that under control.

      • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        You’re right. It’s better than free. It sets those kids up for a healthier life, making them more well rounded into adulthood. It’s a highly returning investment in our future.

        • EssentialCoffee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          But if they deserved to eat, they would’ve been born into families that could feed them.

          • Glytch@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            “If they’re going to die they’d better do it and decrease the surplus population!” Okay, Ebenezer, you go off.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        How much will the children have to pay each time they get a lunch? Or is it more like a subscription where they pay per month or something?

      • Glytch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not shit Sherlock, taxes would pay for it. Better to have our money feeding fat kids than buying more bombs for the IDF.

      • Glytch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Your weight loss solution is starvation then? That’ll kill 'em faster than obesity will.

        • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’ll solve the obesity as well as the financial and logistical issues the article cites

    • MisterD@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      Alas, it is partisan. Republicans love to see the poor people suffer because it makes them feel superior.

      • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        What’s the point of selling your soul for comfort if some of that comfort could be provided for others for free. No no. Others must suffer for the conservative to enjoy what they’ve got

  • makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    3 months ago

    You idiots. Kids with fewer financial burdens don’t want to work in the factory farms! Plus when they do their fancy learning they start to figure out that there could be a better way of life than getting their limbs removed by machines last serviced when they were in diapers. It’s almost like you think kids are white men the way you’re talking about about taking care of them

  • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    No shit sherlock. News break: sending the equivalent of one little merger in the US to countries who cant provide their people with food would make us all live better.

  • moistclump@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is an area the the US is far ahead of Canada in as far as beneficial social programs go and as a former kid who struggled to have a midday meal, I hope y’all protect this with your lives.

  • sablebadger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    My wife works at an elementary school, and a fair number of the kids depend on those school lunches as the only food they might eat that day. The school is in a mixed and low income neighborhood, and for some of the families this is how their kids get most of their meals.

    • Isoprenoid@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      You didn’t read the article.

      It linked to a study that refutes you.

      By 2017-2018, foods consumed at schools improved significantly and provided the best mean diet quality of major US food sources, without population disparities.

      The large improvements at schools were associated with increased whole grains and less saturated fat, SSBs (Sugar Sweetened Beverages), and sodium.

      Source: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2778453

    • epyon22@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Seeing the free meals provided by our schools over COVID they would cover their protein requirements by cheese there was rarely meat in any of the meals.

      • EssentialCoffee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I don’t think that’s a bad thing on its own. Meat isn’t the only source of protein that exists and Americans probably eat too much of it.

        Starting from an early age to not expect meat at every meal otherwise it’s not a meal is probably a good thing.

        • epyon22@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Honestly more worried about the salt and fat from the cheese, though I guess most meat stuff would be similar.

        • Isoprenoid@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          The ketchup as a vegetable controversy stemmed from proposed regulations of school lunches by the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS)

          in 1981

          Mate, your hot take is older than my dad.

          On September 25, 1981, President Reagan withdrew the original regulations proposed by the Food and Nutrition Service due in part to the sharp criticism from the opposition

          Wow, this hot take has gone cold. Send it back.

          • unphazed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Looks at list of terrible shit Reagan did… moves down a few thousand lines, gets to Section II: Good shit

            1. Withdrew ketchup as vegetable

            Kinda similar to my Nixon list with free dialysis

              • unphazed@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Oh not implying that. Just making a stupid comment for the yuks. I seriously learned something. All bad Presidents do at least one thing good. Except Jackson.

          • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            Reagan said insane stuff like this all the time. He thought that America could survive a nuclear war, and that we could put the Starship Enterprise in orbit over the homeland to shoot down Soviet missiles. Basically he was Trump with better hair and smarter handlers.

            Never vote GOP. Never

            • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I like that he wanted to make in the Navy the official song of the Navy until somebody took him aside and pointed out a few things to him.

    • Isoprenoid@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Most of what a kid eats is what their parents eat

      Did you read the article? What if most of what a kid is eating isn’t what their parents are eating?

      Since that time, there has been a substantial increase in schools participating in the Community Eligibility Provision, a federal policy that allows schools in high poverty areas to provide free breakfast and lunch to all attending students.

      So these kids are eating two meals a day that aren’t directly provided by their parent. Sounds like most of their meals aren’t what their parents are eating.

      Also, if they are in extreme hardship, they may not even get to eat dinner with their parents.

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      If kids are getting fed at school, that means the family can afford better stuff. Even if they keep buying garbage, the kids will be exposed to the idea of healthy eating.