free school lunch program question for dano

[cawacko]

As with everything, I will continue to hope & pray that the Republican Party adopts as much of Dano's philosophy as possible for their national platform.

If you think free lunches are a good thing why would you want the Republican Party not to adopt it as a party platform?

 

[TheDanold]

What would be the point of playing your game. You've already stated that you don't give a shit if children are hungry or not so why should I bother? It won't change your position on the issue.

To indulge your silliness (and Obfuscate's), I have worked at the local Boys & Girls Club running a summer program for children whose parents couldn't afford the modest sliding scale camp fees and I can tell you from first hand experience that the lunches that we provided through the summer food program were the only meals that those kids ate some days.

???
Why are they going to camp if they are so poor, what about doing a paper route?

The problem with a lot of Liberals is that whenever someone uses a program, charity or takes something, you automatically assume it's because they can't afford it. You never assume the obvious, which is that their parents simply don't want to pay for it. How can you know?

I've heard your anecdotal evidence, now answer me this:
Are poor people more likely to suffer from starvation or obesity? You know the answer so give this up.

Get the picture and no more Dano. Think about it.

 

[Bonestorm]

???
Why are they going to camp if they are so poor, what about doing a paper route?

The problem with a lot of Liberals is that whenever someone uses a program, charity or takes something, you automatically assume it's because they can't afford it. You never assume the obvious, which is that their parents simply don't want to pay for it. How can you know?

I've heard your anecdotal evidence, now answer me this:
Are poor people more likely to suffer from starvation or obesity? You know the answer so give this up.

Get the picture and no more Dano. Think about it.

They went to the camp because it was the only safe place to play and they were all under the age of 14. The only way they became eligible for the program was through a verification of their parent's income, same as for the free and reduced lunch program. That's how I know, you insufferable prick.

And spare me the jab against anecdotal evidence, glass houses and all.

Finally, even if poor people are more likely to suffer from obesity than starvation, that doesn't change the fact that there are children in American that go hungry, nor does it change your position that even if children were starving you wouldn't want to pay for them to have a meal through taxes.

 

[Bonestorm]

And another thing, get me a picture of your brain. All indications are that you don't have one so I'm operating under the assumption that I'm engaging with a mindless twit, something I shouldn't be doing. I'll ignore your BS until proven otherwise.

 

[Cancel7]

And another thing, get me a picture of your brain. All indications are that you don't have one so I'm operating under the assumption that I'm engaging with a mindless twit, something I shouldn't be doing. I'll ignore your BS until proven otherwise.

Did anyone else get a visual of Dano running to his office copy machine and pulling down his pants in order to get the brain snapshot?

 

[TheDanold]

They went to the camp because it was the only safe place to play and they were all under the age of 14. The only way they became eligible for the program was through a verification of their parent's income, same as for the free and reduced lunch program. That's how I know, you insufferable prick.

My income was low at one point too dork, I've seen plenty of Moms with low income as well, their kids are not starving and many were overweight.
Low income does not equate to starving, nor to not being able to afford camp. They'd just rather spend their money elsewhere.

And spare me the jab against anecdotal evidence, glass houses and all.
Finally, even if poor people are more likely to suffer from obesity than starvation, that doesn't change the fact that there are children in American that go hungry, nor does it change your position that even if children were starving you wouldn't want to pay for them to have a meal through taxes.

Really? Find me a child in America who is starving (because of economic need) and I will send them a check for $1000.

1000$ and no more Dano, all you need is one little picture. Surely, SURELY if it's the problem you claim it is, you can find ONE single person starving in America?

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

dano do you think there should be free lunch programs to children of families who are low income or can't afford to pay for their childrens lunch??

i kinda think they should get rid of this since most families who are low income get welfare and wic and can go to food shelves so why should there be money for free lunches for kids at school?

I kinda think all school lunches should be free for everyone. There. No problems then, no kids going hungry, no incentive for anorexia in our youth.

 

[LadyT]

Or they can't be bothered to make breakfast and just skip it.
Or the parents save their money and just get the school to feed them because it's cheaper.
I bet you anything they get decent meals through the summer at home (when there is no school in session) and don't come back to school in September any skinnier than when they left it, am I right?

Come on leaning, straight up, did you ever remember any kids starving at lunch growing up before this program?

RU really this dense? I'm still convinced you're some sort of liberal bot designed to turn people off from libertarianism. I can honestly say after hearing you post for the last 3 or 4 years, I'll never support one running for office.

As for Rob's question. Free lunches are fine and if that's what my tax increases went to I'd have no problem with it. But as it stands my taxes aren't going to feed or to educate children they are being allocated to such wasteful endeavors as the "Iraqi Freedom (from Stabilization)", guantanamo bay torture, stadiums, and varios other wastes.

 

[Bonestorm]

RU really this dense? I'm still convinced you're some sort of liberal bot designed to turn people off from libertarianism. I can honestly say after hearing you post for the last 3 or 4 years, I'll never support one running for office.

As for Rob's question. Free lunches are fine and if that's what my tax increases went to I'd have no problem with it. But as it stands my taxes aren't going to feed or to educate children they are being allocated to such wasteful endeavors as the "Iraqi Freedom (from Stabilization)", guantanamo bay torture, stadiums, and varios other wastes.

He's not that dense. He just likes to deny that a problem exists because it helps him to justify his position that he doesn't want to pay for hungry kids to get a meal.

 

[Cancel7]

He's not that dense. He just likes to deny that a problem exists because it helps him to justify his position that he doesn't want to pay for hungry kids to get a meal.

QFT

 

[Damocles]

He's not that dense. He just likes to deny that a problem exists because it helps him to justify his position that he doesn't want to pay for hungry kids to get a meal.

I'll happily donate to the local school to ensure that every kid gets a meal. Instead, I am well assured that, at great expense and huge overhead, the federal government will give them some of my money instead.

 

[ironhead]

Children are completely disenfranchised and there are some who do not get much food at home (usually this is down to neglect as opposed to outright dire poverty); I actually support the school lunches program far more than food stamps (which I really don't support) because you at least know for certain that the children are getting food and they are the ones who really cannot help themselves.

That said, I would definitely prefer corporate welfare be abolished and the leviathan military industrial complex be largely dismantled before personal welfare is phased out.