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.
Please hear me out!
I was in the military for 25 years, I lived 60 miles one way from work for 15 of those years. I got up at 5:00 or earlier drove to work every day. I worked very hard for my money, driving home from work I saw many sitting on their porch with a beer, Knowing they had not been to work that day.
I do not believe in welfare for healthy able bodied of age people.
I am in the line at the grocery store behind EBT card holders with a cart full of soft drinks, chips, cakes, ready to eat overall or priced garbage.
Many students get free lunches (paid for by us). Some of the students do not get free meals. Some of them get reduced lunches, they are not given money from their parents.
They go to the cafeteria and sit with the students. Some of the teachers will buy their lunch for them, or they ask students for part of theirs.
I for one believe if you can't take care of your kids do not have them! We have parents that have more children for more welfare, parents on drugs, having children with learning issues.
I do understand things happen. But figure it out.
The bottom line is we have hungry children,it's not their fault.
I worked hard for my money
Take the funds out of the Food Stamp Program,
Why? Because there are kids out there whose parents can not afford paying the fee or whatsoever. Now for those who say that school lunches should not be free , why don't pay while everyone else is having free lunch . We'll see if you wont get frustrated for paying wile others are eating for free .
1. Skipping lunch can cause low blood sugar in children ( especially if they skip breakfast too )
2. Not feeding a hungry child that you are responsible for, is Neglect
3. We can pay an NFL player millions of dollars, spend billions of dollars on the military weapons of destruction, but we cannot manage to feed our school children ???
4. If we fed our school children properly, while at school, they would get better grades, and would behave better. Try it, what do you have to loss.
The school lunch is funded by the government, and the money are come from taxpayers. Think about we are working so hard to support the kids and paying all the taxes each year, AND paying the kids school lunch while the low income family don't pay taxes and their kids getting free lunch, I feel like we work so hard for paying double. That is really unfair.
Right now my girls get free lunch and we have food stamps as well. My husband is the only one able to work because I have to be home to take care of the kids (no money for a babysitter or day care). When we lived in Richmond we had a company who (at first) worked with out schedule and made sure we were never at work at the same time but we still barely made ends meet and did not qualify for any help. Making sure my daughter had a lunch everyday wasn't easy. Often she only had a PBJ sandwich and maybe a banana. Not much for a growing child. When that job called me pathetic because we had no one else to rely on to watch our kids but us we made the steps to move back to my hometown. Jobs are not easy to come by here but now we qualify for government help. I no longer have to worry about a roof over my kids heads or food in their bellies (no I don't stock up on junk food and sodas, those are treats). I also don't have to worry about what my girls are having for lunch or if they are getting enough because I know they will be given breakfast and lunch at school. This is a piece of mind EVERY parent should be able to have. I know my high school years I never ate lunch because the cost was over $2, I knew my mom couldn't afford it. I took only $1 a day to buy an orange juice. My mom tried to argue to take more but I knew we didn't have it and there was not enough food in the house for me to make my lunch like my sister did. I left the money for the bills and the food for my little sister. We didn't qualify for freel lunches because they claim my single mom made too much money, after bills this "too much money" barely left anything for food.
No child should go hungry ever! Just because parents make over the minimum doesn't mean they make enough to Food their families. After insurance, rent, electric, water, and food for the home there is often not enough left over for the overpriced meals a school provides. Even now when our girls have Thanksgiving and Christmas dinners at lunch and parents can come. We don't buy anything. We can't afford the almost $3 price tag on an adult meal at the school. So we go and sit with our girls while they eat.
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.
Because some parents can't afford to pay for lunches and it is a law to go to school, the government is making you go, you have to wake up early, so I think that the least they could do for us is give us some food during the evening so we are not starving until we get home.
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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
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
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.
I don't believe that parents who can afford to pay should have their children fed on another persons dime. If the family is truly in need that is another story. Our country is going broke, we have an unfathomable amount of debt as is and this is just another entitlement program. This time, however, the entitlement is being given across the board even to those who can and should be paying. I homeschool my children, tax payers save around $20,000 a year because I do this. I get NO help in purchasing curriculum or supplies and I am not allowed to use any resources from public schools. I feel I have to do this in order for my children to get the education they need. So now not only do I end up paying out of my own pocket and not being able to use school resources but now those who use it also get their kids fed 10 out of 21 meals for free and my taxes pay for it. No ma'am, if you can afford it you need to pay it.
Essentially, people with children, and with a decent income, are asking for people without children to contribute in paying for their child's food. It sounds like beggary from the well-off, to me. Would you ever ask your childless neighbor to pay for your office meals, or any other necessity that you can afford yourself? If not, why are your child's meals an exception? Schools should provide the option of buying food, and also free food for those who truly need it.
Another thing to consider is that this food isn't being appreciated, and probably isn't very nutritional; if it was only free for the needy, we might be able to improve its quality, which would benefit all children. I have seen parents, countless times, complaining about how the food is so terrible that their child would rather famish than touch it; in the other extreme, I have heard it being accused of contributing to the country's obesity problems, because it's so rich in calories. If that is the case, why are we even debating?
What is more, I haven't seen one convincing argument in favor of the policy: most of it is general platitudes. The one argument I've heard that carries some weight is that by distinguishing the children into eligible and non-eligible, the eligible ones are vulnerable to social stigma and subsequent bullying. This is true, but in the first place, it can be handled rather easily (by making eligibility anonymous) and in the second place, it says more about the schools' anti-bullying policies than about the issue at hand.
Some people need and deserve free lunches. Their parents cannot afford to feed them at home because of income problems. Other people have plenty of money and could afford to eat breakfast at home or school. These people don't need a free breakfast at taxpayers' expense just because they are too lazy to eat before going to school.