"igh
Dec 13, 2012 at 5:24 p.m.
Suggest removal

kawisixer - you're right on target with every post. And I'd be willing to bet that soon the government (you and me) will be paying for their cell phones, computers, satellite dish, gas money....should I keep going?
"
I am telling you cigs will be next. "an addiction" you know and why should THEY have to apy for that too!!!!????

There is enough "unfortunate event" children that we need a universal welfare food system set up at every school in the city for every student? Look at the USDA poverty statistics. The incidence of children truely living in "hunger" in this nation is rediculously low. Your heart is bleeding like there are hundreds of children at every school in the city facing true famine and you are trying to transform the exception into the standard. Get real. This nation has the highest obesity rate in the world among children. To claim that our children are "suffering famine" is laughable. The pepole who are likely to most beniefit from this are likely already on multiple forms of assistance. If they need more food to sustain their chaildren than do it through the current assistance programs already set up and get them to have more family time enjoying a breakfast together in the home. But do not confuse the school system with a friggin bread line and remove the rightful providers of this service (charitable orgs) from the equation while offering them a door prize.

kawisixer01,
Public education is indeed a socialist program, what is your point? There is such a thing as healthy socialism. It is in our best interest to give great educational opportunities to all children in the United States, regardless of who their parents are or what they've done. That does include making sure they don't spend the entire day at school hungry.

You seem very high and mighty. Do you think that all children who grow up in a home that would benefit from these breakfast clubs had parents who were "not mature enough" to have them? Have you ever heard of an unfortunate event? Maybe a supporting family member died. Maybe property was lost or destroyed, but by some loophole, costs could not be recovered. Maybe someone was incarcerated for something they didn't do. Perhaps an unfortunate medical situation bankrupted the family. Or maybe a divorce happened, not because of lack of maturity, but because these things happen.

You throw insults at these children and their families like candy at a parade.

Give me a break. They weren't mature enough to have kids, but they had them anyway? You are talking about the miracle of life. Believe it or not, many people living below the poverty line are not leaches too lazy to be productive members of society.

We all pay to educate children and we all get the benefit that comes from that education, doctors, police officers, fire fighters etc or at the very least people who can read. The problem with your argument that the tax payers should not have to pay for it but charitable origination's should is that they are not doing it everywhere it is needed in Janesville, so what is your answer to the kids at Lincoln or Edison, Franklin, or the other schools that do not have charitable groups that are willing to come in, go hungry? and i will say it again, if you can't see the difference in feeding hungry kids and providing free cell phones, gas that speaks more about you.

kawisixer - you're right on target with every post. And I'd be willing to bet that soon the government (you and me) will be paying for their cell phones, computers, satellite dish, gas money....should I keep going?

By it's very nature and definition setting up a universal social welfare program that is intended to feed the populace is a socialist ideal. If you want to pay more for that, fine go ahead through charitable organizatiion, or perhaps organizing your own neighborhood breakfast club, but it should never come to the burden of the tax payers to support. I'm not saying that breakfast clubs or gatherings should not exist. What I'm saying is the tax payer should not be forced to support such things that are not vital to running this country, ESPECIALLY when we are facing the greatest financial calamity the world has ever seen. I've chose not to have children yet in a large part due to the financial ramifications of doing so. I should not be forced to lose even more of my hard earned money to support people who were not mature enough to consider the same things. I already pay to support educating their children. I have no problem with that, having an eduicated populace improves our society as a whole. But I draw the line at feeding, clothing, and supporting those same children, which I have gone without the joy of having myself.

I never said i want to live in a socialist country . I do however want to live in a country where children have enough to eat and do not have to go to school hungry. Do you understand what that must be like sitting in school with no food in your stomach trying to pay attention, get an education, so you can be a productive member of society when all you can think of is I am hungry. Surely their are other people who can pay a little more or receive a little less to make sure a young child can have a small breakfast at school.

Andrew- "starving" is a bit of a stretch, this nation is full of the most obese children in the world, now considered a national pandemic. I have no problem paying my taxes for things that are necessity to running this country. The constitution laid out the powers of the federal govt. Those were limited to international trade, defense, securing borders, etc.I have absolutely no problem paying for that. I love this country and want the best for it. Heading down the road of entitlements and social welfare when we are in the worst debt in history and on the bring of a financial crash yet never seen in the history of the world is not the right path. It's one that multiple failed nations have already shown is wrong, and the people suffer. The "if you don't like it get out" is narrow minded and not in the spirit of the democratic republic that this nation was formed as, taking all views and all considerations of those in the country. I could say the same argument, "if you want a socialist govt than move to china, cuba, venezuela, Russia, or any other country whose citizens have traded their liberty and freedom for govt handouts." This country is full of people who see no value in providing for oneself, earning things in life, and only buying what you can pay for, only buying what is necessary when you are broke. Hence the reason the govt is broke. We are on the verge of crashing, the govt should be putting itself into budget contingency and only providing necessary services until they can get the budget in line and balanced without raising taxes and burdening the working people more. Not signing up to things like this that citizens should be providing on their own or through banding together as a community.

gmretirednow that is only 150 to feed each person for a month. kawisixer01 if you don't want to pay taxes their are places you can move to not pay them or as much Andorra has a 0% income tax, Azerbaijan,Brunei, Macau,Monaco Qatar also pay a zero percent personal income tax. Because you apparently are living in a state of constant fear over paying your taxes to help prevent kids starving those may be an option.

momof- I agree with you. My children have occassionally gone to breakfast club when I have to go somewhere early, and, I never minded them going because they would bring with them a box of cereal or a gallon of milk, or something - with the idea being that they were contributing more than what they were taking.

I won't be comfortable allowing the kids to attend breakfast club once it becomes a federal program. To me, this is taking the program from being a community centered program with parents and community members chipping in to being a handout.....

Way to destroy a good program.

Andrew I said some problems in some dysfunctional families, and not nearly enough of those justify a govt beurocracy setting up a universal social program funded by the tax payers as nothing but a side effect of manipulating world food markets to benefit the farmers. I did not lump all into one stereotype. You might want to explore reading comprehension. I have no problem supporting this on a voluntary charitable basis ran by the community to enrich itself. I do however have a problem with the govt forcing people to do it with inferred force. I feel great taking my money and giving it to united way or a church to support things like this. I abhor the govt forcing me to fund it behind the shield and force of their badge and gun with forced taxes and tariffs, at the risk of losing my home and freedom if I don't agree.

I definately do not agree on the free breakfast or lunch in fact. I know someone who has 6 people in a household, 2 adults and 4 kids, gets badger care plus $900 in food stamps per month. They should be able to afford breakfast foods for the kids plus a sandwich for lunch. Too much free stuff being given in this state......

I'd like to see better food. It is rare to see an underfed kid in American these days. they're out there, but I see a heck a lot of overfed kids, and yes, I volunteered to serve at the breakfast club for 3 years.
-
Overfed and undernourished.....The American way.

no where in my post did i say you said that. you did say they are dysfunctional however and that is stereotyping.

And I have no problem with people volunteering these things. If the COMMUNITY wants to come together and VOLUNTARILY support such things that is great. I work an insane amount of hours to support what I do have in life, so no I do not volunteer. But I devote a portion of my pay check VOLUNTARILY to united way to support such programs. I am fine with VOLUNTARY CHARITABLE organizations. I am NOT fine with my TAX money going to support mixing educational and social programs.

one if my children would go to the "breakfast club" to socialize he didn't eat because he said that he liked my cooking better than cold cereal, he did enjoy the company better than waiting at school when I went to work (I work first shift) so for us it was VERY important. So to you criticizers there are many kids and parents who use this program as a sort of before school supervised keep my kid safe and occupied type program

WTF are you talking about Andrew, not one of my posts has the word "drug addict" or "drinkers", sounds like you are the one stereotyping and reading things in.

Do you think maybe a big reason low income kids are not suffering from malnutrition is because of school lunch and breakfast programs? I can tell you do not volunteer at echo or other food banks because if you did you would not be so cold. Please stop stereotyping not all people who struggle are drug addicts, drinkers or dysfunctional. Before you make such comments maybe you should get first hand knowledge.

Thekai-Yes I do believe it, I am a person who has worked third and night shifts for most of my career. I realized a long time ago that I could not offer a child enough time and money to have a good life. So I made the mature decision to not have children until I could. I didn't just have them anyways and then expect society to handle things for me.

I am not denying there is some genuine problems among some dysfunctional families, but the problem is not widespread enough to justify the universalization of either free lunches of free breakfasts. Malnutrition is defined by the USDA at the "uneasy of painful sensation caused by lack of food", but it appears that nearly all "hunger" is "short term and episodic rather than continuous". On a typical day, according to the govt, fewer than half of one percent of Americans will experience hunger because of lack of money. In fact, multiple studies confirm that, on average, "low-income" children are quite well fed and there is little evidence of "under nutrition". -Charles Sykes

Believe it or not, some impoverished families only have one household income. Believe it or not, sometimes the parent (or if lucky, parents) work before school starts. People do sometimes struggle, you know.

When I went to the breakfast club, it was always early in the morning. Those volunteers are outstanding people, and they taught me many lessons I still hold onto today. I probably wouldn't even be the same person without the great experiences I had.

You sound like a sour old gus. Maybe you are, maybe you aren't. It doesn't really matter. You obviously fail to recognize what a valuable tool the breakfast club is, and the wonderful lessons programs like these can teach our children.

By the way, making sure children do not go hungry during the school day has a direct impact on their educational experience. Hunger is a very powerful distraction.

maybe you need to join the real world many people are struggling they do not have enough money to provide breakfast for their children in some cases because of things they can control and in others things that are not in their control in any case it is not the kids fault and they should not be punished by going hungry. Again if you can't understand that it says more about you then anything else.

Yes children are dependent...on their parents. Their parents should be setting the example of rising early, making breakfast and sitting down in each others company to talk about your day ahead. Not getting dressed loaded into a car and heading to school expecting a meal. Are we raising a generation of children who will come to the workplace expecting a free meal in the morning?

While I ultimately do not agree with it, I can see the argument that this type of program risks teaching some parents to be irresponsible, I cannot see the argument that this teaches children to depend on the government. These are children! What do you want them to do, work in sweat shops to earn their breakfast? "Please sir, may I have another?" If you don't get it, I guess you just don't get it. Children are already dependent (as is natural).

The govt not feeding children is punishing them? You are kidding right? So we punish society and make us all pay instead? Take a history lesson on the origins of the school lunch program. Taking children and lining them up to the public trough is a vital life lesson to the kids isn't it? Just teach them young that the govt is their savior. That they DON'T have to work, that they can just sit back and take hand outs. It is not what school money should be going for. I intend my tax money to be used on educational materials; books, computers, supplies...FOR LEARNING. Not to ease the burden of a parent that suddenly realizes that it's inconvenient and out of their budget to feed their children.

I wouldn't mind it, as long as they take away from the parents. We pay "for the children" at every level because their parents won't provide for them. Fine, the parents get nothing, feed them at school

yes kawisixer01 lets punish the children for the sins of the parents. If you can't draw a line between feeding kids in school and the government taking over industry that speaks more about you then anything else.

This is sickening. Just adding more people suckling from the govt teat and getting indoctrinated from youth to expect something from the public trough. We'll reward young people who can't afford the children they are having. The school lunch program was originally a side effect of the govt getting in the business of handing out money to farmers. There was a surplus of food due to govt subsidies to farmers, so hey what do we do with all this extra food? Let's give it kids in schools. At first it was for the "poor". But we don't want the "poor" to feel bad and be ostracized about taking a hand out and being poor. So we better make it available for free to all children. It's all about the children...just think about the children! Where should we stop? We should probably move on to subsidizing American clothes companies, just think then we can clothe the children for free too! The state this country is in is sickening. At one time there was a certain sense of embarrassment in taking a hand out from the public trough, and rightfully so. It was an incentive to get yourself back to work. Now there has been a phase shift, you are seen as a fool if you aren't signing up for and taking advantage of this "free stuff!"

At least the churches won't be so involved anymore. Keep your religion in your church & away from my kids.

You really are upset the school is feeding children? While I understand their parents should be, some can't and plenty more aren't. I'd much rather feed them breakfast, lunch, and dinner and reduce or eliminate their parents foodshare! Let the parents go hungry!!

How many people commenting on this are young enough to have enjoyed the breakfast club? This is a service provided to children.

Thanks Obama, you are doing a stellar job of making some people totally dependant on our tax dollars.

Sigh...... The nanny state expands.