I am a student who doesn't get free lunch because"my dad earns too much". IT IS NOT MY PROBLEM THAT MY CLASSMATES HAVE THE LAZIEST PARENTS THAT DON"T WORK AND THEN ALL OF SUDDEN THE GOVERNMENT IS LIKE HERE HAVE SOME FREE MONEY AND LUNCH. While my dad is working his butt off working overtime for over TWELVE HOURS to earn that. To make that WORSE, where do you think that FREE money comes from. From people like my dad. They take nearly half of his pay check to give it to all these lazy. THEN THEY JUST ASK HOW MUCH HE MAKES, BUT IN REALITY HE DOESN'T MAKE THAT MUCH!!! I THINK I DESERVE FREE LUNCH!!!
If students cant pay the fee for the lunch then they wont be able to eat and they will just be hungry all day because they wont be able to eat because they don't have enough money to git the food. This is why there should be no lunch fee.
Most people are not as rich as other and might be at the risk of going to poverty because their parent's job isn't paying enough or they just don't have the money to pay for food at school.. It's the school's job to educate students and not make them pay for lunch. Of course the school needs some money to keep things in order but they can always get that money from the field trips money. Or they could have fundraising twice every month. Students shouldn't have to starve at school when they are starving at home because they barely nothing to eat at home.
Whether you're wealthy, poor, or middle class, giving one child a benefit that does not give another is not fair to other children. This places a labile on the child and begins to show them how society places people in classes. My wife and I are upper middle class and have two children, one of which is 13, she is now realizing that the kids that get the free lunches call the kids who have to pay "rich" and "stuck up" and vies verse for the kids who get a free meal.
My daughter was 7 dollars negative in her school account and the lunch lady came over to her table, in front of the entire cafeteria and removed and threw away her chicken nuggets from her plate, but a child that receives a free lunch this would never happen too. It was so embarrassing for her and really upsetting as a parent. We now keep her balance at a hundred dollar minimum This would never happen ifwe treat everyone thesame, correct? This is what society wants now..
Im doing an essay right now and people who say no are retards. If your kid cant have a nice meal at home or a meal at all its not your fault. You dont want your kids to be stupid so you use what little money you have for an education so they dont grow up to be retards like the people who voted no.
When I was 15 years-old we had a Conservative government and my dad was a shipyard worker. The Conservatives decimated Britain’s heavy industries in order to crush the unions and, as a result, my dad was made unemployed.
This meant I was entitled to free school meals but the school I went to was a grammar school (there was an entrance exam and most of the kids came from posh families) and I was the first and only child to ever be eligible.
As a prefect, I was entitled to go to the front of the queue with the teachers to get my lunch, but when the headmaster heard that I was on free school meals he announced to the school that anybody on free school meals would have to wait at the back of the queue until every other child had been served and only then could get their lunch.
In fact, I felt I’d rather go hungry than subject myself to such humiliation which meant I couldn’t concentrate properly in the afternoon lessons because I was so famished.
Who know why a child's lunch account becomes negative. Is it a lazy parent who can afford to keep the account current, but doesn't keep up with paperwork, a single parent household, where a parent must choose to pay certain bills before others, a two parent household, who make less than $23,000 (for a family of 4) keeping them just below poverty....What ever the reason, the innocent child should not suffer. We all remember how hard school is: fitting in, bullying, homework, changing bodies, safety.....Now add to that HUNGER! Let's assume the family is poor and not neglectful or lazy, by offering a free lunch we eliminate the class divide, we stop pointing out the "poor kid". We know a full belly of food, leads to better performance in learning and less disruptions. If the child is not eating at school, can we be sure the child is eating at home, maybe that child needs more nutritional benefit then others. Why should the lunch lady, be a debt collector? Plus in the end, it the right thing to do, have heart, imagine for just a moment being that poor, hungry child.
It should because if a family does make more money than another then them paying and others not still isn't fair. Not only that but people that pay for lunch might forget their money or their parents might not give them money so they wont eat. This is something great to do
Just because parents might have more money doze not mean that they have $4.50 everyday for lunch and breakfast.Sometimes my family has to give me their lunch money just so i can eat its not fair to them or to me. Students that qualify get lunch and then throws the food away while other students that dont qualify get bread and cheese/w milk.
Being a public school, we do not force parents to pay for textbooks and other materials / equipment. Just notebooks/pens/calculator are items that are normally bought by the parents. If as a country, we can feed other people in other nations and build their nations, we can feed American children. Yes, taxpayers pay the cost but I would rather have my taxes pay for American school children than pay welfare to foreign nations. And I don't have kids.
Someone is going to pay for the meal somewhere along the line, the reason for this is that the money for the meal will have to come from tax payers money, eg. Your parents. And that is the end of my bit of this amazingly beautiful argument. Thank you for reading
All public school students should not receive free breakfast and lunch regardless of their income because taxpayer's money provides for these meals and this hurts the tax payers. If parent's cannot afford to send their kids to school with a decent lunch then those kids should get a free lunch, but what is the use giving a free lunch to kids whose parents can clearly afford it? I personally don't even go to public school and my parents would be paying for these 'free' lunches.
Schools should not provide free lunch because think of all the waste from the children not liking the food or the child doesn't eat veggies with this attitude there will be a lot of food going to waste. Also think of how many children have allergies 19.6% of Australians have food allergies the lunch ladies will also have to tend to every child's needs and there isnt enough time in the school day top do that.
Firstly, if schools have to provide free meals for their students, they will have to divert from their true purpose - to provide the environment for learning to students. Diverting their resources available into creating free meals for the students will mean that money that was used to create new learning facilities will be cut in order to provide the free meals. Also, who is to say that the food provided by the school is even suitable for the students? Schools will have to resort to using fast meals in order to provide students with meals on time, and most fast food options aren't the types nutritionists will advise. Allergies will mean that food restrictions will be made in order to prevent an anaphylactic reaction. This will mean that it is possible for fish, eggs, gluten, nuts, dairy, and much more to be banned in order for anaphylactic students to be able to have and enjoy free meals, otherwise they will have to bring meals themselves. Isn't that discrimination to those we need to look out for most? We also need to take into consideration that not all students like the healthy options some schools will offer, choosing to avoid it. This will mean that students will miss out on lunch, which is even worse then having to pay for it. Free meals simply cannot compare to the care and love mothers put into making their child lunches, and only parents know the likes and dislikes of their child, so why step into their shoes and make matters worse? Diverting resources into food will also imply that the wage of staff may have their hard earned wages cut, or even lose their jobs, and on top of that, the school needs to provide even more money to hire chefs, nutritionists, and food officials in order to make the free meals. Australia is already in the deep end in terms of economy, and we definitely don't have the budget to support such a high costing initiative like providing free meals for all students.
Feeding children is the responsibility of the parents not the school. School free lunch program should be eliminated. It is not expensive or time consuming to pack a lunch for your children. If you can't even do this simple task, maybe you should have thought about it before having them.
Let's face it the country is going broke. Just because they want to be nice they give the rich people a chance to have free lunch. If you can't pay for that is another thing, they have a program for that, but if you can pay you should this is one way that the school gets their money. If the school goes broke your child may end up in a bad school all because you didn't want to pay for school lunch. Well guess what you can pack your lunch if you want. Packing lunch isn't too expensive. I mean if you have to McDonalds is on almost every corner for a reason! Anyway that is just my thought. (P.S. It is right)
In Economics, the first thing we learned was TINSTAAFL, which means there is no such thing as a free lunch. Someone is going to have to pay for it. My school does have free breakfast, and is nice because its free and easy because its on campus. But so much food is thrown away, because they serve old cheap fruit, that no one is willing to eat. Now on to the free lunch subject, I think it should be abolished there was a girl in 8th Grade who was on free and reduced lunch, but she also bought chips, cookies, soda, and snickers with her lunch, and that would cost the same as a school lunch. And I believe its not fair for people actually paying for the school lunches, for the lunches to be of lower quality. When Im paying $2.50 for a lunch, and I get a terrible chicken sandwich, because thats the only thing that is actually edible, but I get the same quality as the kid standing behind me in line, who gets it free. And the biggest complaint I have is that if you don't have money in your account, or you forget to bring it. They don't even FEED you. But they can give it away for free, but no if a paying child forgets it, to bad for you.
Because the United States is already in so much debt, we do not have the money to be putting towards lunch for people who can (and can't!) afford their own. While it is true that school is a legal obligation, parents have a responsibility to feed their children both at home and at school.
If you cannot fully support your child, dont have one in the first place. Those that can, sure, go ahead. But offering free meals to all is stupid. When I was younger, my father paid for school meals, and I enjoyed it, and shared it with my friends who couldn't afford it. It made sure I had vegetables and the like.. There is nothing wrong with that. When I got old enough I made my own lunches and there is nothing wrong with that. And my god it doesn't cost an arm and a leg for some bread and butter. You don't need to eat duck and cavier for lunch kids.
So you want the government to educate you and since you are too lazy to bring a lunch we will provide one for you, Now you get out of school and the government now has to find you a job or give you money for unemployment and or welfare and or food stamps and or section 8 (free housing). I make over $100,000 /yr and bring a PBJ sandwich every day. Why ? Because it is easy to make and cheap. Get off your lazy ass and help yourself for a change.