Wouldn't that rule out voting for many expediters?
Chicago Public School Kids told NO HOMEMADE LUNCH FOR YOU
- Thread starter chefdennis
- Start date
Wouldn't that rule out voting for many expediters?
I am not at all suggesting that babies be put on diets, and I realize that fat is good for their brains. What I'm saying is that 4 month old babies are looking like 12 month olds used to look 35 years ago, and IMHO, it ain't pretty. And further, I believe 'we' (society) are encouraging parents to set their babies up for a lifetime issue with obesity by fattening them up like that while they are infants.
Thank you for the info, I will look that up, because if that is true, it is revolting that childhood obesity would DOUBLE within 2 years. That's wild and very scary!
I also think it's revolting that the parents not be given a choice on whether they MUST pay to have their children eat institutional food that someone else (who?) deems to be 'healthy', or eat food brought from their homes. This is a money grab because they think they CAN, and apparently they are right, they can and they are!
This is a much different issue than the health department mandating that all catered lunches paid for by THEM will be healthy, ie not french fries. It's also much different than a school or other government institution deciding to only serve 'healthy' foods in their cafeterias. Those people have a choice on whether to eat there or not. This is not a choice, by the sounds of it.
The schools aren't successfully teaching basic math and English skills any more, but DANG if they aren't going to tell themselves they're at least succeeding at teaching parents what to feed their children.
Think about this... IF the school has a cafeteria, and they are supposed to be making money from it, or breaking even at least, and not enough parents, for whatever reason, are paying for that, what are they going to do? Ah ha! They're going to mandate that ALL the kids MUST eat there, or not eat at all. Kind of like how you can't bring your own food into a restaurant.
This has zero to do with health, it's all about money.
I think of it as an issue like clothing: because some parents allow kids to wear wildly inappropriate clothing [grade school girls dressed like they're going on MTV, controversial T shirts, bandannas in 'gang colors'], all the kids have to suffer the consequences of rules that reduce their freedom, too.
If it's about money, parents should remind the schools that profit is not the goal, or an acceptable byproduct, either.
Maybe a compromise can be achieved, with food kids like being served one or two days a week...
Bottom line is that something has to be done about childhood obesity, and parents aren't doing it - or, not enough are.
If it's about money, parents should remind the schools that profit is not the goal, or an acceptable byproduct, either.
Maybe a compromise can be achieved, with food kids like being served one or two days a week...
Bottom line is that something has to be done about childhood obesity, and parents aren't doing it - or, not enough are.
We're pretty much limited to voting for the candidates, and that's the problem: they have to be wealthy to win elections. What $ they lack, they have to trade promises [denied in public, of course] to get. The candidate gets elected, the big donors get rewarded, the public gets screwed.
Money talks and rules in politics.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
hmmm seems the good Dr Washington has said that Childhood Obesity has hit a plateau...
U.S. Childhood Obesity Rates Level Off : NPR
Oh and the above quote was from 2008, the late the Dr....
As to the Doubling, doesn't seem so according to the CDC and Dr Washington, but it did increase 3 fold over 3 decades..or 30 yrs..
Childhood Obesity - DASH/HealthyYouth
Yea kids are still overweight, but then there are the Gov studies that say there are more to the issue the food intake, like family income, race, and where people live...so I guess "Redistribution of wealth" should be part of the answer...
I'll go back to the original statement that it isn't the schools or the gov's place to dicate what people feed their kids...if the parents can't control what their kids eat, it certainly isn't the publics or the govs place to do it....unless you are all for the gov running all aspects of your life and paying for everyones irresponsibilities.....oh wait, that means that someone else is responsible for the upbring of someone elses kids....
This issue is about the libs need to "Control" the people....
U.S. Childhood Obesity Rates Level Off : NPR
Oh and the above quote was from 2008, the late the Dr....
As to the Doubling, doesn't seem so according to the CDC and Dr Washington, but it did increase 3 fold over 3 decades..or 30 yrs..
Childhood Obesity - DASH/HealthyYouth
Yea kids are still overweight, but then there are the Gov studies that say there are more to the issue the food intake, like family income, race, and where people live...so I guess "Redistribution of wealth" should be part of the answer...
I'll go back to the original statement that it isn't the schools or the gov's place to dicate what people feed their kids...if the parents can't control what their kids eat, it certainly isn't the publics or the govs place to do it....unless you are all for the gov running all aspects of your life and paying for everyones irresponsibilities.....oh wait, that means that someone else is responsible for the upbring of someone elses kids....
This issue is about the libs need to "Control" the people....
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Well I didn't want to sound like I was actually picking on you, it was a good concise jumping off point. I do agree that the problems turn into a lifetime issue but there is also something to be said about how France tackled their infant mortality rate in the late 1800's with nutrition and how their findings actually hold more true now than it did than for the issue of fat kids.
Actually nope not true. The public education system we have has nothing to do with achieving the happiness nor has to do with chances. IT is there as a service from the government to ensure there is growth resources from the population and that's about it. NO one is guaranteed an education, they are guaranteed access to one. The same as is someone wants to pursue a career, there is no guarantee to that career but the access to one is there.
ONCE we didn't have classes, people built empires from a lack of education and now you have to have a college degree to work in a factory because of some idea that college degrees make people smarter.
Another actually nope thing. The founding fathers seem to feel people under 21 were not mature enough to vote and women could not vote in federal elections. They left the door open for those in the future to decide on the state level what process they wanted, and up until the 20th century, voting was more or less a haphazard affair. A real solution is not to tie it to paying taxes but to getting government checks, like welfare. Get welfare or even social security, then you can't vote - a fair way of preventing those who feel they are entitled to be out of the loop.
Well again your issue isn't his, two different issues but for that matter, the solution is the fair tax.
NOPE again money is part of the equation. There is that guy in South Carolina that seemed to prove money is not always a factor. He didn't win but he did get exposure.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
This is a pretty good defintion of what the gov wants of Public Education....
IMO, any claim to knowing what another person 'really' wants, thinks, hates, etc, is just a lame argument, because it can't be challenged, and therefore remains as if it were true. Which it could be, but who knows? [Yes, you believe you do, but I'm not so sure.]
Unless the claim is regarding someone who might see and respond to it, it's not exactly persuasive.
What has "the gov" to whom you refer say about what he wants of education?
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
Cheri wrote:
Here you go, from the Gov's website:
Federal Role in Education
And they continue to fail....
Here you go, from the Gov's website:
Federal Role in Education
And they continue to fail....
Cheri wrote:
Here you go, from the Gov's website:
Federal Role in Education
I'm not seeing any resemblance to the Mencken quote....
And they continue to fail....
In a lot of ways, yes. But a LOT of parents are failing too - and there's no accountability for them. At least the schools have some oversight.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Ah... really off the mark.
Most of the gains in this country made in the 18th century and early 19th century were people who didn't look at class as something that stopped them. We didn't think then as we do today as they always have in europe where you are born into a specific station in life and remain there. The formal education has little to do with the actual person being successful but we have conditioned ourselves to think that the education is more important than the work ethic - example are kids leaving college and EXPECTING a high paying job that is equal to those who worked there way up for 20 years. ANOTHER example is what many 40-60 year old unemployed are facing, the education may be there and the experience is but the type of degree boxes you in and companies don't want to employ you unless you are fresh out of school or uneducated in the field.
Not many I know. Besides they DO pay taxes and lots of them. Fuel tax. Excise taxes etc.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
Since when do we require as a people "oversight" of how a parent feeds their child???? Unless they are doing something illegal, like starving them, or poisoning them...it is really not the governments or schools business...oh and it isn't mine or anyone elses business if a parent wants to feed their kids sodium filled processed lunch meat or hot dogs daily....its not against the law..yet...
Last edited:
As reported on the 10 o clock Chicago news last night , this is more about how much revenue the school gets.These children all qualify for reduced lunch. Therefore its about money, They now are looking into this issue.Beside's it is another form of goverment telling you what to do.Dont we have enought of that already.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
DaBus wrote:
No!! The government needs to take control of this issue because parents just aren't getting the job done..what they have been doing forever "just isn't working"...the government / schools / health dept. knows what is best and in the best interest of the people...the people can no longer be left to their own means and take responsibility for their children or their actions...the government must take control of this issue, if for nothing else then saving the people from the future medical cost...you know, the people that make the money, need to pay now, so they don't have to pay later...you understand the "shared cost"..you paying for what the gov thinks is the right thing to do....
No!! The government needs to take control of this issue because parents just aren't getting the job done..what they have been doing forever "just isn't working"...the government / schools / health dept. knows what is best and in the best interest of the people...the people can no longer be left to their own means and take responsibility for their children or their actions...the government must take control of this issue, if for nothing else then saving the people from the future medical cost...you know, the people that make the money, need to pay now, so they don't have to pay later...you understand the "shared cost"..you paying for what the gov thinks is the right thing to do....
Last edited:
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Are you sure about that? I remember reading that the right to vote was limited to being white, male, and a landowner. It wasn't until Andrew Jackson came along and changed it to white, male, and has a pulse.
Personally, I think the founding fathers had it right. They saw it as being a responsible citizen to own land, and thus to vote. I don't think it should go quite that far today, but some people who vote clearly should not be able to.
Me..I would cut the morning breakfast programs and the milk program in any school district that has them... parents on assisted living (welfare) already has the amount required to feed their children...why should I the taxpayer pay twice?
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
While I'm not a fan of the morning breakfast program, I don't believe everyone it helps is necessarily on the public dole. There are poor people who don't receive gubmint bennies.