Opinion of the School Lunch Program

[Ban my account ffs!]

There was an article in the Star Tribune about how more parents are depending on school lunches (free of charge due to them losing a job or what have you).. and the comments section was deplorable.

"If you can't afford the school lunches, then pack a lunch for the kids."

"All kids should have free lunch so they can be dependent on government and grow up to be fine standing democrats.  Then when the illegals don't have enough food the democrat kids can steal from the republican kids and provide for them (keeping 85% for themselves of course)."


I mean.. REALLY!?!?  School lunches?  What the f**k is this nation coming to?

By the way:  Make school lunch free for every child.  Then nobody can complain about subsidizing the riff raff.  We're all subject to the same bad food that way.

[Torie]

It is a pretty small beer issue. I am interested in much bigger game actually. Going after rodents simply does not excite me much. I don't know enough about the school lunch program to have an informed opinion.

[Ban my account ffs!]

It is a pretty small beer issue. I am interested in much bigger game actually. Going after rodents simply does not excite me much. I don't know enough about the school lunch program to have an informed opinion.

Well, it doesn't take much thinking to figure out the program.  Lunch is provided at schools across the nation with basic nutritional guidelines (that a student must have a fruit, a veggie, a meat or meat substitute, etc.)... and many children are eligible for reduced lunch prices or free lunch.

Most schools also offer breakfast.

The point is that children who might not have adequate food and nutrition at home can get good nutrition at school.  In many poor areas, schools will pack a take home dinner for the kids too if it is apparent they may not otherwise get fed.

It's one of the most widely accepted forms of "assistance" and truly provides a good benefit to children.  If you don't want your kid eating that food, you're welcome to pack a lunch for your child with foods of your choice without paying for any school lunch.

[TheGreatOne]

It should be given to people who apply for it and given to students on case by case basis.  I don't want to see schools take away lunch from impovershed students.

[Torie]

Do the kids actually eat the fruits and veges, or just toss them in the trash, and eat a candy bar that they brought from home?  Just curious. That certainly is what I would have done, although I didn't have a sweet tooth, so it would probably have been well, maybe a bag of potato chips, or by high school, maybe some laced brownies or something.

Oh I see, it is simply providing a food service, not free lunches, except on a means tested basis. In that case, how much does it cost per meal to provide this service? And I have heard in almost obsessional tones, the term "hot" lunches used (as if hot has some nutritional benefit qua being hot), which sounds expensive. How about providing bagged lunches that one can buy, and get at reduced prices or free on a means tested basis? I wonder how much that would save?  In addition, the infrastructure of building a cafeteria and kitchen, and manning it, and preparing the food,  sounds expensive too.

[Conservative frontier]

Get rid of it.

Parent's should be able to feed their own children, not a government-run school.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Do the kids actually eat the fruits and veges, or just toss them in the trash, and eat a candy bar that they brought from home?  Just curious. That certainly is what I would have done, although I didn't have a sweet tooth, so it would probably have been well, maybe a bag of potato chips, or by high school, maybe some laced brownies or something.

The high schoolers just toss it in the trash.. but you don't have to take what you won't eat in high school.  The elementary kids are pretty much told they have to eat the stuff.  

[Ban my account ffs!]

Get rid of it.

Parent's should be able to feed their own children, not a government-run school.

And if the parents don't feed the kids?

I want a real answer.  Not a kneejerk one line reaction.

Oh, and I hope for your sake you've never eaten hot lunch once in your life.  Even if you pay "full price", it's still subsidized.

[Ebowed]

Parent's should be able to feed their own children, not a government-run school.

It's people who believe stuff like this that make me question whether politics is even worth it.

[Verily]

It's not totally clear to me that people actually can't afford to feed their children, for the most part, although of course there are such cases. Certainly the problem is far less acute (and would be far less acute if the program were abolished) than it was when school lunches became standard. But school lunches are still probably a good idea, if only to prevent Lunchables from working its dastardly magic on more innocent children.

[John Dibble]

I'm fine with it. We're providing the children with schooling to begin with, and if there are kids who don't have lunch because their parents can't afford it then their performance is going to suffer due to them being hungry in the latter half of their day. If we're going to spend the money to invest in public education I don't mind spending a little more on free food for those who can't afford it so we get a little more out of our investment. Option 3.

Do the kids actually eat the fruits and veges, or just toss them in the trash, and eat a candy bar that they brought from home?  Just curious. That certainly is what I would have done, although I didn't have a sweet tooth, so it would probably have been well, maybe a bag of potato chips, or by high school, maybe some laced brownies or something.

The high schoolers just toss it in the trash.. but you don't have to take what you won't eat in high school.  The elementary kids are pretty much told they have to eat the stuff.  

In my high school the side items weren't on the tray by default, only the main item. You'd pick out what you wanted (within reason - you'd be expected to pay more if you got too many sides) so there wasn't too many instances of people throwing out unwanted veggies. If they had too many leftovers they'd let you take extra no charge so as not to waste it. I don't recall many people not eating their veggies though, so I don't think it's an issue either way.

And yeah, the elementary and middle school kids largely would just be expected to eat their veggies.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I'm fine with it. We're providing the children with schooling to begin with, and if there are kids who don't have lunch because their parents can't afford it then their performance is going to suffer due to them being hungry in the latter half of their day. If we're going to spend the money to invest in public education I don't mind spending a little more on free food for those who can't afford it so we get a little more out of our investment. Option 3.

Do the kids actually eat the fruits and veges, or just toss them in the trash, and eat a candy bar that they brought from home?  Just curious. That certainly is what I would have done, although I didn't have a sweet tooth, so it would probably have been well, maybe a bag of potato chips, or by high school, maybe some laced brownies or something.

The high schoolers just toss it in the trash.. but you don't have to take what you won't eat in high school.  The elementary kids are pretty much told they have to eat the stuff. 

In my high school the side items weren't on the tray by default, only the main item. You'd pick out what you wanted (within reason - you'd be expected to pay more if you got too many sides) so there wasn't too many instances of people throwing out unwanted veggies. If they had too many leftovers they'd let you take extra no charge so as not to waste it. I don't recall many people not eating their veggies though, so I don't think it's an issue either way.

And yeah, the elementary and middle school kids largely would just be expected to eat their veggies.

If kids aren't getting lunch because their parents don't send it with to school, I think we have more than just "performance issues from being hungry later in the day" to worry about.  You'd be talking child neglect at that point.

[Free Trade is managed by the invisible hand.]

I never actually bought lunch at school....I just scavenged and begged for food instead.

[memphis]

It's generally a good program but it needs some serious work. The crap they serve in schools in extremely unhealthy. Most of it is just a giveaway to the farmers. High school lunches are mostly pizza and tater tots. Milk? Seriously? A huge number of kids are lactose intolerant, and nobody needs all the calories.

[Ban my account ffs!]

It's generally a good program but it needs some serious work. The crap they serve in schools in extremely unhealthy. Most of it is just a giveaway to the farmers. High school lunches are mostly pizza and tater tots. Milk? Seriously? A huge number of kids are lactose intolerant, and nobody needs all the calories.

I disagree about milk.  But I'm from an area that is about 90% northern European stock and we traditionally have the lowest levels of lactose intolerance.  Kids drinking skim milk (or even 2%) with their meal is not going to kill them *unless* the alternative is water.
You wanna talk about empty calories, then we should start talking juice.  Fruit juice is very bad for you.  Eat a piece of fruit.  Drinking juice is like eating fruit without it actually filling you up at all. 
Doctors now days recommend giving your child only milk or water to drink.  They don't say milk because they're shills for the dairy conglomerates... but because milk is beneficial when you drink low fat milk and in moderate amounts.  It provides calcium which is very very important for kids and it provides protein without being chock full of sugars like juice.
Otherwise, I agree with you.  We could offer soy milk to kids as an option that offers the same benefits of milk (as well as being even healthier)... and fruits and veggies.  Why not let the schools prepare more of the food?  The last bits of this disappeared when I was in elementary school and it's all just "unbox, heat, and serve" now.

Let those lunch ladies earn their money!

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

As long as the public school system exists, school lunches should be provided universally.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I said option 2 - at least for Michigan.  But it depends on the state, in my opinion.  Here in Michigan, there's talks of cutting K-12 education funding (and this is under a Democrat governor) to pay for college funding, and that's ridiculous.  College funding doesn't matter if you can't even afford to get kids throuhg K-12.

At this point, schools are cutting things in mass quantities, and can't really afford much.

I don't know much about the program, but there are some areas that it would work better than others.

[Magic 8-Ball]

I went with Option 3.

Why not let the schools prepare more of the food?  The last bits of this disappeared when I was in elementary school and it's all just "unbox, heat, and serve" now.

Let those lunch ladies earn their money!

When I was in high school, we had people who made deli sandwiches, cheeseburgers, burritos, and salads right in front of you.

Is there a nationwide trend toward bland, frozen stuff or is this just happening in areas that have always had trouble funding schools?

[Ban my account ffs!]

well.. they made that stuff too in high school.. I'm talking elementary school... they still "make" the food.. but it's all pretty much heat and serve.

Like sloppy joes.. they get "sloppy joe" mixture in a can and they warm it up and put it on a bun for you.

Inks:  If Michigan cuts aid to schools, that likely doesn't affect school lunches.  At least in MN, the food/lunch budget is always separate from the general budget and most of the food budget comes from the feds or from families. 

General fund stuff would be staff and operations outside of transportation and lunch programs.

[John Dibble]

I'm fine with it. We're providing the children with schooling to begin with, and if there are kids who don't have lunch because their parents can't afford it then their performance is going to suffer due to them being hungry in the latter half of their day. If we're going to spend the money to invest in public education I don't mind spending a little more on free food for those who can't afford it so we get a little more out of our investment. Option 3.

If kids aren't getting lunch because their parents don't send it with to school, I think we have more than just "performance issues from being hungry later in the day" to worry about.  You'd be talking child neglect at that point.

There's a difference between not doing so because you are unable to for financial reasons and not doing so out of neglect and not caring. The free or reduced price school lunch option solves the first problem and as I said I support that. The option is pretty visible and prevents that sort of situation in most cases.

The second problem wasn't even a consideration in my stance as it's not the same problem and the solution is not the same - social services exists to deal with that sort of thing.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Option 3.

[Vepres]

There was an article in the Star Tribune about how more parents are depending on school lunches (free of charge due to them losing a job or what have you).. and the comments section was deplorable.

"If you can't afford the school lunches, then pack a lunch for the kids."

"All kids should have free lunch so they can be dependent on government and grow up to be fine standing democrats.  Then when the illegals don't have enough food the democrat kids can steal from the republican kids and provide for them (keeping 85% for themselves of course)."


I mean.. REALLY!?!?  School lunches?  What the f**k is this nation coming to?

By the way:  Make school lunch free for every child.  Then nobody can complain about subsidizing the riff raff.  We're all subject to the same bad food that way.

Dude, don't take a few internet nuts seriously, because they're just that.

Making it free for all is simply irresponsible. Schools are already having budget troubles, the states shouldn't mandate more spending like that.

[Хahar 🤔]

Get rid of it.

Parent's should be able to feed their own children, not a government-run school.

Please leave the Internet.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Option 3.

[Magic 8-Ball]

well.. they made that stuff too in high school.. I'm talking elementary school... they still "make" the food.. but it's all pretty much heat and serve.

Like sloppy joes.. they get "sloppy joe" mixture in a can and they warm it up and put it on a bun for you.

Inks:  If Michigan cuts aid to schools, that likely doesn't affect school lunches.  At least in MN, the food/lunch budget is always separate from the general budget and most of the food budget comes from the feds or from families. 

General fund stuff would be staff and operations outside of transportation and lunch programs.

Gotcha.  I took "the last bits of this disappeared when I was in elementary school" to mean that they disappeared at all levels.

Either way, my paramount concern here is that the food that is being served isn't properly screened for bacteria.