Free meals for all Detroit schoolchildren in fall

**English** · August-17-11, 09:50 AM

Originally Posted by JBMcB

Aren't you pointing out that the main reason kids are going hungry, or aren't eating well, isn't lack of access to food, but various social factors?

The lunch programs are nice, but just a band-aid to a larger problem. I'm not sure why people insist that good food costs more than bad food - for the price of a single McDonald's "value" meal you can buy enough vegetables to make salads for a week.

But most Americans eat like crap, and defend their right to do so. The effects are most acute in urban food deserts like inner-city Detroit, but Ann Arbor and living overseas completely transformed the way that I think about food. Middle America isn't eating veggies and salads, either. The upper middle class and the wealthy do, but not in MANY communities across Detroit that I could name.

**canuck** · August-17-11, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by JBMcB

Aren't you pointing out that the main reason kids are going hungry, or aren't eating well, isn't lack of access to food, but various social factors?

The lunch programs are nice, but just a band-aid to a larger problem. I'm not sure why people insist that good food costs more than bad food - for the price of a single McDonald's "value" meal you can buy enough vegetables to make salads for a week.

There should be food preparation/nutrition courses as part of the curriculum in all high schools. How about teaching gardening and putting those two on a par with phys ed? What goes for the US goes for Canada by the way. The same crappy foods are served in many school cafeterias here.

**iheartthed** · August-17-11, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by bartock

I wouldn't question those stats, I think Bham is right on. It is a matter of priorities for the parents. $5,000 homes and $50,000 cars sort of thing. 25 cent bag of chips and a pop for breakfast. Skinny children with obese mothers.

The only thing more ridiculous than someone driving a $50,000 car while living in a $5,000 house is someone who believes that that is at all representative of American poverty.

bartock · August-17-11, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by iheartthed

The only thing more ridiculous than someone driving a $50,000 car while living in a $5,000 house is someone who believes that that is at all representative of American poverty.

Agreed.......

**coracle** · August-17-11, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by Detroitej72

I say this program is long overdue. As was stated above, this is the only opportunity many kids get for a nutritious meal. As a civilized society, we should feel morally obligated to provide for our children to be feed. I can't imagine why anyone would be opposed to this policy.

I'm opposed to the policy. Why should we pay to feed kids who can afford to pay for themselves just to obscure the stigma of other kids being poor. Life in the real world is not Socially Engineered to make people feel better.[[or at least it shouldn't be) Once we introduce dependency to a student where's the plan to ween him from it after graduation? Why don't I get Food Stamps so that those that do don't feel a stigma? No need to answer - I know why? With policies like these we're all going to end up dependent just to save somebody having their feelings hurt.

bartock · August-17-11, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by English

I definitely would question those stats, simply because the past 10-15 years have completely decimated urban communities across the nation.

For argument's sake, let's say that you are correct. It may be sad that government is stepping in, but honestly, what's the alternative? Either you force people to be good parents [[how do you do that?), or you do whatever it takes.

If we wish to engage in coercion, we will become a very different society. I'm willing to have that conversation here, in Lansing, and in DC if we need to have it. But let's extend the conversation beyond "oh, these adults SUCK -- these kids don't have a chance!" And then 20 years later, we are having the same conversation about the parenting skills of today's kids.

From "for argument's sake" on down, I agree with you 100%. My comment was that it is sad, not wrong.

**iheartthed** · August-17-11, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by coracle

Once we introduce dependency to a student where's the plan to ween him from it after graduation?

Why does there needs to be one?

Why don't I get Food Stamps so that those that do don't feel a stigma? No need to answer - I know why?

Because you're grown.

**coracle** · August-17-11, 10:51 AM

"Because you're grown"

No you've got it wrong iheartted. Maybe I should have made it multilple-choice.

**hamtown mike** · August-17-11, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by 48091

Fox2 said it was 40%, but that doesn't seem right.

That 40% figure is the trigger to cover the whole school. That is, if 40% of students are currently receiving free lunches, the entire student population will begin receiving free meals.

That means 60% of the student body, who could afford to pay for their meals, no longer have to. In my opinion that's 60% waste, plus the added benefit of 100% of the students become faced with the stigma of receiving free food.

I'm sorry there is a stigma or embarrassment associated with needing help. That's something I've had to learn in my own life, how to ask for help. But I'm a grown ass man- telling a child to ignore the sneers and tauntings of their classmates while asking for help is a hard ask.

I fully agree that no child should go hungry. Learning on an empty stomach is difficult. But is this indoctrinating a whole bunch of kids to a failing system of assistance who would otherwise not be exposed to it.

There is a much better way. Many commenters on the Free Press article mentioned a card system, that all students must use, keeping everyone from knowing what anyone is paying. Those students who qualify continue to receive free meals. Other students pre-pay for their lunch with credits added to the card. At the register all anyone would hear is "beep." I think putting this in place is a far more reasonable way to fight the stigma, with less waste while avoiding the introduction of a whole new set of future adults to a system of false entitlements.

**ResurgetCineribus** · August-17-11, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by hamtown mike

...

I fully agree that no child should go hungry. Learning on an empty stomach is difficult. But is this indoctrinating a whole bunch of kids to a failing system of assistance who would otherwise not be exposed to it.

...

To the student, the meal is free regardless whether the state or their parents pay for it. This hardly is indoctrinating them into a system of assistance. They're already indoctrinated, its called being a kid.

**iheartthed** · August-17-11, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by hamtown mike

But is this indoctrinating a whole bunch of kids to a failing system of assistance who would otherwise not be exposed to it.

Uh... Giving a child a taxpayer funded lunch for free who is attending a taxpayer funded school for free is "indoctrinating" him to a "failing system of assistance"? So I guess the answer is to get rid of public schools?

**hamtown mike** · August-17-11, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by ResurgetCineribus

To the student, the meal is free regardless whether the state or their parents pay for it. This hardly is indoctrinating them into a system of assistance. They're already indoctrinated, its called being a kid.

Then they should not be embarrassed or fear the stigma which this program is aimed to eliminate.

**hamtown mike** · August-17-11, 11:26 AM

And the "indoctrinating" is in reference to the up to 60% of students at a school who are not currently receiving free meals.

**ResurgetCineribus** · August-17-11, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by hamtown mike

Then they should not be embarrassed or fear the stigma which this program is aimed to eliminate.

They should absolutely fear the stigma. Having to stand up for yourself because your parents are poor is a terrible burden to place on a child. The whole point of this is to help eliminate that burden.

**iheartthed** · August-17-11, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by hamtown mike

And the "indoctrinating" is in reference to the up to 60% of students at a school who are not currently receiving free meals.

But... You're missing the point. From the child's point of view this just becomes another function of the school process, just like receiving his schoolbooks for free. The payment process for lunches is being completely abstracted out of the lunch room, just like every other process in a public school. That's all this is about. It isn't about training kids to stand in lines at a soup kitchen.

**rjk** · August-17-11, 12:32 PM

The card system sounds like a great idea, problem solved.
It would solve the problem, but it's not a give-away in an election year.
That's not an anti-Obama comment, but an anti-politician in an election year comment. They all do it.

**DetroitTeacher** · August-17-11, 01:28 PM

Call it what you like, but I call it feeding a kid who needs a meal. I don't know what the issues are that prevent people from offering their kids a decent meal. I can't even begin to fathom what might be going through a kid's head when they have to give their name to be checked off on the list of "free lunch kids". Some parents won't even return the free lunch forms because they don't want the school knowing their business. I don't understand it but I agree with the thought that it's not the kid's fault that their parents are boobs. The kid is hungry, we feed them. Nothing much has changed, it's just something that everyone gets now. I've purchased more school lunches than I care to say because a kid was hungry and there was no free lunch form on file for them. Sometimes, even the kids who have parents who could afford lunch money don't have it because the parents don't give it to them. That's not the kid's fault. We can NOT blame the kids in this situation.

We do have a garden on school grounds that is now up and running. The nutrition teacher [[who also feeds kids all day long) will be using the veggies to teach kids good nutrition. The teacher in charge of the garden has been working with kids to show them how to plant various things and how to upkeep the garden. ANY kid who would like to work in the garden can do so. Most kids do and they come in and volunteer to do so.

Originally Posted by JBMcB

Aren't you pointing out that the main reason kids are going hungry, or aren't eating well, isn't lack of access to food, but various social factors?

The lunch programs are nice, but just a band-aid to a larger problem. I'm not sure why people insist that good food costs more than bad food - for the price of a single McDonald's "value" meal you can buy enough vegetables to make salads for a week.

**1953** · August-17-11, 06:59 PM

I find this extension alarming and find it even more alarming that, by one account, this could be rolled all to all schools across the U.S. The federal government should not be feeding all American children 5 days a week.

1953

**Roq** · August-17-11, 07:25 PM

Originally Posted by 1953

I find this extension alarming and find it even more alarming that, by one account, this could be rolled all to all schools across the U.S. The federal government should not be feeding all American children 5 days a week.

1953

OMG...the HORROR! We're feeding schoolchildren!

**JBMcB** · August-17-11, 08:32 PM

Originally Posted by Roq

OMG...the HORROR! We're feeding schoolchildren!

Why not offer free food for everyone? It seems like there are plenty of adults who are basically children who happen to be old. In fact, how about this - large communes out in the middle of nowhere. If you are incapable of taking care of yourself, you can sign up for a free apartment. Free food, free cable TV, free XBOX360 games. You just have to leave the rest of civilization alone.

**Goose** · August-17-11, 09:17 PM

i think people are missing the point of what some people are posting.. no one is opposed to feeding kids that are in need and do not get fed at home....

thats not the point of this program, free meals already exist for these kids

the "new" program only extends the free meals to EVERYONE, to reduce the stigma of getting in line for free food, the stigma of being poor...

so now kids that can afford to pay or were getting their breakfasts and lunches from home will now get free food... THAT MONEY IS COMING FROM SOMEWHERE..... its not Obama money pulled from thin air......

I wish there was a program that handed out A's to reduce the stigma I felt of being stupid when I received a D....... im sure a program is in the works.........

**English** · August-17-11, 09:27 PM

Originally Posted by Roq

OMG...the HORROR! We're feeding schoolchildren!

I know, right?

After this, the deluge...

**canuck** · August-17-11, 09:47 PM

I wish the stigma of having to pay 6 dollars for a box of cereal so that joe the CEO's take home pay can hit 7 digitsrange were lifted off people who make 9 bucks an hour.
The horror, the horror... Colonel Kurtz...

**Hypestyles** · August-17-11, 11:58 PM

http://hypestyleshomebase.blogspot.c...tptinyurl.html

**ResurgetCineribus** · August-18-11, 12:29 AM

Originally Posted by rjk

The card system sounds like a great idea, problem solved.
It would solve the problem, but it's not a give-away in an election year.
That's not an anti-Obama comment, but an anti-politician in an election year comment. They all do it.

The card system does not solve the problem because someone still has to put money into that card's account. Therefore, it it does not account for:

1. Kids whose parents are too poor to pay the card but too proud to admit they require assistance, and

2. Kids whose parents are capable to pay the card but don't

The free meal for all students is the only way to completely level the playing field. I sum the ideology up as simply: a learning environment like a school should be a place where a student's socioeconomic status and home life has no bearing.

I'm not sure about this since I don't work at a school, but I imagine the "stigma" for being on the free meal list is a euphemism for "tormented and bullied by their peers." Granted there will always be bullies, but when there is a damning mark so obvious as this we need to reconsider the system.

So should schoolchildren have to pay for their meal? The more I think of it, the more ridiculous it seems that they do since so many other things at a public school are provided for free. I would like to see some numbers if anyone out there knows a typical school's cafeteria budget.