Free Lunch

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

I feel for you mate because I know how ugly you are inside. I am too. But I've learned to accept and deal with my own disadvantages and pain instead of wishing the equal on everyone else.

 

[BlancoNino]

What in the hell are you talking about?

 

[ZeGermans]

Here's the main reason I support school lunches for those that can't afford it:

How is it the child's fault? You conservatives are extremely concerned with the life of a fetus before it leaves the womb... then you just wash your hands of it. Why should the child pay for the unneeded extravagance of the parents? If they want to screw themselves into a grave, that's just fine. But the children will have a chance with free public education, free school lunches, and tons of scholarship oppurtunities. Obviously this path will be tougher for them than it would be for someone that was born rich, but it at least tries to level the playing field. That's why school lunches, public education in general, and scholarships are free.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

That's pretty funny coming from an administration that doesn't know how to stop spending! :laugh:

I'm not part of that administration nor do I agree with it's spending except for on our military.

We spend more on our military than all of the rest of the world combined. How can you rationalize that this is reasonable and necessary?

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
Here's the main reason I support school lunches for those that can't afford it:

How is it the child's fault? You conservatives are extremely concerned with the life of a fetus before it leaves the womb... then you just wash your hands of it. Why should the child pay for the unneeded extravagance of the parents? If they want to screw themselves into a grave, that's just fine. But the children will have a chance with free public education, free school lunches, and tons of scholarship oppurtunities. Obviously this path will be tougher for them than it would be for someone that was born rich, but it at least tries to level the playing field. That's why school lunches, public education in general, and scholarships are free.

But the vast majority of these children can get fed by their parents. The poor live pretty damn well in this country. No, I don't want children to go hungry, but really free lunch is just the government being the babysitter and it gives excuses for people to have children when they can't afford to feed them.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
Here's the main reason I support school lunches for those that can't afford it:

How is it the child's fault? You conservatives are extremely concerned with the life of a fetus before it leaves the womb... then you just wash your hands of it. Why should the child pay for the unneeded extravagance of the parents? If they want to screw themselves into a grave, that's just fine. But the children will have a chance with free public education, free school lunches, and tons of scholarship oppurtunities. Obviously this path will be tougher for them than it would be for someone that was born rich, but it at least tries to level the playing field. That's why school lunches, public education in general, and scholarships are free.

But the vast majority of these children can get fed by their parents. The poor live pretty damn well in this country. No, I don't want children to go hungry, but really free lunch is just the government being the babysitter and it gives excuses for people to have children when they can't afford to feed them.

You don't give a crap about whether children are hungry or not. All you care about is the few pennies out of your pocket it costs. Compassionate my ass!

The program costs about $50 per "working" person per year and if you break it down in income class, I would guess that the middle and poor class people pay esentially nothing for the program (naturally the poor pay nothing, they are receiving it).

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I have more respect for makind as a whole than you.

Doubtful. See my question above, for example.

Why are you [Bush opponents] so quick to call the conservatives...

1)Evil
2)Greedy
3)Murderers

even during a simple debate about school lunch programs. What have you guys got to hide?

It is not all conservatives. It is just the neo-fascists, currently infesting Republican leadership, who hide behind a "conservative" banner. They have little in common with traditional conservatives.

 

[BlancoNino]

You don't give a crap about whether children are hungry or not. All you care about is the few pennies out of your pocket it costs. Compassionate my ass!

I'm trying to have a legitimate argument here. You're the one who's not being compassionate right now with your personal attacks on me.

Personally, I'd really like to see schools eliminate a lot of programs such as free lunch (and breakfast) and instead of passing the budget surplus onto the taxpayers, give it to the faculty (teachers, administration, etc). They don't make enough money for what they do.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
*YAWNS*

No wonder our country has taken a conservative twist. Lack of substance for the liberals I guess.

Do you EBT's ever get tired of coming back? No wonder most people dislike conservatives, they don't know when to shut up.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
What the hell are you guys talking about?

HISTORY LESSON: SCHOOLS FUNCTIONED WITHOUT FREE LUNCH BEFORE AND EDUCATION WAS EVEN HIGHER AT THE TIME!

Question: Why should my tax dollars be spent for parents who have children when they can't afford to feed them? How is that my fault?

Question: If these kids are 5 years old at school, they were obviously fed up until then, so why can the parents suddenly not afford to feed them? Oh well, with that extra money in their parents pocket, they can go by some more booze and watch hours of mindless cable television.

Fortunately, America is both prosperous enough and compassionate enough that we aren't forced to answer those questions. It is the right thing for those children. We do the right thing because we can.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

You don't give a crap about whether children are hungry or not. All you care about is the few pennies out of your pocket it costs. Compassionate my ass!

I'm trying to have a legitimate argument here. You're the one who's not being compassionate right now with your personal attacks on me.

Personally, I'd really like to see schools eliminate a lot of programs such as free lunch (and breakfast) and instead of passing the budget surplus onto the taxpayers, give it to the faculty (teachers, administration, etc). They don't make enough money for what they do.

I'm more compassionate to the working poor that greedy people like you. Actually, I have no compassion for you at all. It would be justice to see people like you need the assistance, just after it were all eliminated.

 

[BlancoNino]

But myself and many others don't agree it's the right thing. Why are we creating incentives to have children when couples aren't able to afford them?

 

[BlancoNino]

I'm more compassionate to the working poor that greedy people like you. Actually, I have no compassion for you at all. It would be justice to see people like you need the assistance, just after it were all eliminated.

I am the working poor. I make 10,000 a year, live in a small house with a friend, and go to college. I am able to feed myself, cloth myself, and even have time for fun. The only help I get is from my parents who help pay around half of my tuition. I'm glad you are compassionate toward me.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
But myself and many others don't agree it's the right thing. Why are we creating incentives to have children when couples aren't able to afford them?

They why try to abolish abortion? And no, it's not off topic. The same effect is achieved.

Try a national poll and see if it's results aren't similar to your current poll. It would be. There are compassionate people in the US...you sir, are not one.

Do you receive financial aid to go to school by chance? Student loans? Grants?

 

[BlancoNino]

They why try to abolish abortion? And no, it's not off topic. The same effect is achieved.

Try a national poll and see if it's results aren't similar to your current poll. It would be. There are compassionate people in the US...you sir, are not one.

I'm not against abortion. I feel there are a lot of children who should either be aborted or given up for adoption as their parents are not fit to raise them. However, I strongly encourage abstinence until you're married, financially secure, and prepared to have a kid.

I'm sorry but Free Food at schools is not synonymous with compassion. As the evidence I have provided clearly states, the children who qualify for free lunch or being raised by parents who can afford to feed them anyway.

I would also like to add that this is another argument that supports my theory about the comparison of Social Programs and Drugs. We use them to help a problem, but we are soon addicted and cannot immediately stop without heavy consequences. If we stopped a lot of parents would be at a loss as they haven't fixed their budget to include meals for their children. However, this is not to say that they can't fix it into their budget.

 

[Engineer]

Curious...why do you even care at this point if you don't even make enough money to pay taxes? Hell, do you receive earned income credit (which I wouldn't mind seeing removed as I don't think you should get more than you paid in)?

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: Engineer
Curious...why do you even care at this point if you don't even make enough money to pay taxes? Hell, do you receive earned income credit (which I wouldn't mind seeing removed as I don't think you should get more than you paid in)?

I don't plan on making 10,000 a year forever my friend. And no I don't receive earned income credit.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: Engineer
Curious...why do you even care at this point if you don't even make enough money to pay taxes? Hell, do you receive earned income credit (which I wouldn't mind seeing removed as I don't think you should get more than you paid in)?

I don't plan on making 10,000 a year forever my friend. And no I don't receive earned income credit.

And the amount of it that will go to school lunches is less than a drop in the bucket compared to your hallowed military spending (a question you avoided, I note).

 

[glenn1]

I'm more compassionate to the working poor that greedy people like you.

If you were compassionate, you'd be making sandwiches and taking them down to the starving tots. Volunteering other taxpayer's money to do so isn't compassion, it's abdication of responsibility.

 

[BlancoNino]

Well first of all defense is extremely expensive to fund. Our federal government's job is to provide a military, not school lunches. In my opinion the military should be the most costly program because there is no substitue for it. Without a military, millions of lives could be lost...not just here...but throughout the world.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: Engineer

I'm not part of that administration nor do I agree with it's spending except for on our military.

Well, I don't agree with the military spending on Iraq and, since I don't get a choice, we're even...you don't want free lunch for poor children and I don't want money spent on a lie....
[/quote]

If you want to play that game, our Iraq spending is dwarfed by our socialist medicare/SS budget.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: glenn1

I'm more compassionate to the working poor that greedy people like you.

If you were compassionate, you'd be making sandwiches and taking them down to the starving tots. Volunteering other taxpayer's money to do so isn't compassion, it's abdication of responsibility.

I agree. The Kennedys are this way also. They advocate tax hikes and massive government spending on social programs yet they make damn good sure their wealth is sheltered from taxes.

And yes, if you look at the pie chart for our federal governments budget you will see that social programs dominate now where they didn't 50 years ago.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
Here's the main reason I support school lunches for those that can't afford it:

How is it the child's fault? You conservatives are extremely concerned with the life of a fetus before it leaves the womb... then you just wash your hands of it. Why should the child pay for the unneeded extravagance of the parents? If they want to screw themselves into a grave, that's just fine. But the children will have a chance with free public education, free school lunches, and tons of scholarship oppurtunities. Obviously this path will be tougher for them than it would be for someone that was born rich, but it at least tries to level the playing field. That's why school lunches, public education in general, and scholarships are free.

Why not consider it a slow method of "abortion"? :laugh:

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: glenn1

I'm more compassionate to the working poor that greedy people like you.

If you were compassionate, you'd be making sandwiches and taking them down to the starving tots. Volunteering other taxpayer's money to do so isn't compassion, it's abdication of responsibility.

Feed sandwhiches to babies?

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
Well first of all defense is extremely expensive to fund. Our federal government's job is to provide a military, not school lunches. In my opinion the military should be the most costly program because there is no substitue for it. Without a military, millions of lives could be lost...not just here...but throughout the world.

I agree the military is vital, but you continue to avoid my question. How can you rationalize that spending more than the rest of the world combined is reasonable and necessary?