Since nutrition standards were strengthened in 2010, eating at school provides many students with healthier food than is available cheaply elsewhere. Plus, reducing stigma increases the number of kids getting fed.
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.
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.
Why is feeding children so controversial?
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.
“Socialism! Marxists!”
Because it’s being called “free” when it is not.
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.
But if they deserved to eat, they would’ve been born into families that could feed them.
Are you alright man?
“If they’re going to die they’d better do it and decrease the surplus population!” Okay, Ebenezer, you go off.
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?
Not shit Sherlock, taxes would pay for it. Better to have our money feeding fat kids than buying more bombs for the IDF.
Because they’re obese
Your weight loss solution is starvation then? That’ll kill 'em faster than obesity will.
It’ll solve the obesity as well as the financial and logistical issues the article cites
Fuck it, I’ll publicly admit I found this funny