D.C. Schools Offer Supper (Dinner) to Kids

[Farnhamia]

This conversation is a total distraction.

The very foundation of our school system is rotten. It was sponsored and designed by industrialists to equip a crop of workers with what they deemed to be minimal education standards. This is not a system based on choice, nor is it friendly to free-thinking teachers who seek to implement new lessons.

Delete it, and start over.

Start over with what, pray?

[Laerod]

However I do not like it. Having the government feed people is a sign of massive failure.

This requires an assumption that a world without anyone being needy at any time is actually possible.

[West America]

hnh.

Why not just have the kids move in then? Make them all boarding schools. Since the government wants to be their mommy and daddy anyhow, it seems.

[Farnhamia]

hnh.

Why not just have the kids move in then? Make them all boarding schools. Since the government wants to be their mommy and daddy anyhow, it seems.

By gad, you're right. Let's just let them starve, shall we? They should be required to do it out of sight, however. The last thing I want to see are sunken-eyed waifs on the steps of our sacred National Monuments.

[Laerod]

hnh.

Why not just have the kids move in then? Make them all boarding schools. Since the government wants to be their mommy and daddy anyhow, it seems.

Is there a point hidden here somewhere? The reall mommy and/or daddy can't or won't provide, so society steps in.

[Daistallia 2104]

It sounds like a good program that'll have some long term benefit with a higher graduation rate and higher college or trade school graduation rate.

Here in Iowa one of the big issues in the gubernatorial race is the "Statewide Voluntary Preschool Program for Four-Year-Old Children" the current legislature and governor gave the state, which has similar goals regarding graduation rates. The former governor is running for office again on a ticket of it being a waste of money.

... or due to their parents making bad spending decisions.

Considering adult obesity rates in this country...

No, I meant that's dangerous. Have you ever eaten meals from the school? Its terrible. I think they're trying to kill them all.

With the food being served these days, that's not much of a joke. Also, the USDA safety standards for school lunches aren't even as good as those for fast food places. (See also: http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/ ... cost_N.htm). And those are just for starters without taking into account the general decline in healthiness of school meals. When I was a kid, school lunches were unappetizing but decently healthy - you got realish food, veggies and milk were automatic, and there weren't vending machines anywhere in the school.

[Brogavia]

This conversation is a total distraction.

The very foundation of our school system is rotten. It was sponsored and designed by industrialists to equip a crop of workers with what they deemed to be minimal education standards. This is not a system based on choice, nor is it friendly to free-thinking teachers who seek to implement new lessons.

Delete it, and start over.

What?

The whole point of school is to get you ready for your life after you leave. And guess what you do when your an adult? You work or go starve. So shouldn't the school system be designed to churn out new workers?

And how would you change it?

[Militsia]

However I do not like it. Having the government feed people is a sign of massive failure.

This requires an assumption that a world without anyone being needy at any time is actually possible.

I would say that it is possible to have a world where you don't end up in a situation where you would have to feed people to protect your ongoing investment in them. America on the other hand is built on the idea and principle that people should take care of themselves, not the government.

[Militsia]

However I do not like it. Having the government feed people is a sign of massive failure.

This requires an assumption that a world without anyone being needy at any time is actually possible.

I would say that it is possible to have a world where you don't end up in a situation where you would have to feed people to protect your ongoing investment in them. America on the other hand is built on the idea and principle that people should take care of themselves, not the government.

[Laerod]

The whole point of school is to get you ready for your life after you leave. And guess what you do when your an adult? You work or go starve. So shouldn't the school system be designed to churn out new workers?

Not only, no. Schools need to teach kids to be good citizens. This requires an ability for critical and reasoned thinking as well as a decent knowledge base. In other words, the school system needs to churn out more than simple workers.

[Laerod]

This requires an assumption that a world without anyone being needy at any time is actually possible.

I would say that it is possible to have a world where you don't end up in a situation where you would have to feed people to protect your ongoing investment in them.

Not really, no. This would require a world in which everyone earns at least enough money to feed themselves and their kids without the government aiding them. This is not realistic. Every economic definition of full employment has a percentage of unemployed.

America on the other hand is built on the idea and principle that people should take care of themselves, not the government.

A pipe dream. Not everyone everwhere will always be able to support themselves on their own. Nor can Joe Sixpack handle a number of things that he would need to in our modern world. Among these are national defense and health insurance, to name two.

[Daistallia 2104]

America on the other hand is built on the idea and principle that people should take care of themselves, not the government.

Demonstrably wrong.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States

[Farnhamia]

America on the other hand is built on the idea and principle that people should take care of themselves, not the government.

Demonstrably wrong.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States

Indeed ... "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

[Sibirsky]

I wonder if Michelle Rhee is behind this program. She has done a wonderful job laying off poor performing teachers, cutting down the administrative bureaucracy by nearly half, while improving test scores and graduation rates. Considering that helped DC Schools close a $666 million budget deficit last year, the $5.7 million cost of the program is peanuts.

That being said, Michelle Rhee may be out of a job soon. Performance does not matter. DC is a big Democrat stronghold, the Democrats love unions, and the unions hate Michelle for laying off so much staff.

[MisanthropicPopulism]

This requires an assumption that a world without anyone being needy at any time is actually possible.

I would say that it is possible to have a world where you don't end up in a situation where you would have to feed people to protect your ongoing investment in them. America on the other hand is built on the idea and principle that people should take care of themselves, not the government.

No, it's not. Reagamerica on the other hand is.

[Militsia]

America on the other hand is built on the idea and principle that people should take care of themselves, not the government.

Demonstrably wrong.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States

That is not a reference to social welfare. General simply means "non-spesific", not directed at any group. Welfare means things like promotion of commerce, communications, travel etc. The intention was not to help individuals in financial troubles, but rather programs that would be of general benefit and welfare. Prior to the new deal programs government sponsored social welfare programs was virtually unknown in the United States.

[MisanthropicPopulism]

Demonstrably wrong.

That is not a reference to social welfare. General simply means "non-spesific", not directed at any group. Welfare means things like promotion of commerce, communications, travel etc. The intention was not to help individuals in financial troubles, but rather programs that would be of general benefit and welfare. Prior to the new deal programs government sponsored social welfare programs was virtually unknown in the United States.

Probably because Americans weren't being entirely conditioned to be self-serving douchebags.

[Sibirsky]

I would say that it is possible to have a world where you don't end up in a situation where you would have to feed people to protect your ongoing investment in them. America on the other hand is built on the idea and principle that people should take care of themselves, not the government.

No, it's not. Reagamerica on the other hand is.

[Laerod]

Demonstrably wrong.

That is not a reference to social welfare. General simply means "non-spesific", not directed at any group. Welfare means things like promotion of commerce, communications, travel etc. The intention was not to help individuals in financial troubles, but rather programs that would be of general benefit and welfare. Prior to the new deal programs government sponsored social welfare programs was virtually unknown in the United States.

Um, this being before the days when socialism was coined, yes, it does mean social welfare. General welfare = public welfare = social welfare.

[Langorham]

I wonder if Michelle Rhee is behind this program. She has done a wonderful job laying off poor performing teachers, cutting down the administrative bureaucracy by nearly half, while improving test scores and graduation rates. Considering that helped DC Schools close a $666 million budget deficit last year, the $5.7 million cost of the program is peanuts.

That being said, Michelle Rhee may be out of a job soon. Performance does not matter. DC is a big Democrat stronghold, the Democrats love unions, and the unions hate Michelle for laying off so much staff.

FYI Rhee has resigned already and is being offered a position in New Jersey by Christie.

ttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con ... 05658.html

[Sibirsky]

I wonder if Michelle Rhee is behind this program. She has done a wonderful job laying off poor performing teachers, cutting down the administrative bureaucracy by nearly half, while improving test scores and graduation rates. Considering that helped DC Schools close a $666 million budget deficit last year, the $5.7 million cost of the program is peanuts.

That being said, Michelle Rhee may be out of a job soon. Performance does not matter. DC is a big Democrat stronghold, the Democrats love unions, and the unions hate Michelle for laying off so much staff.

FYI Rhee has resigned already and is being offered a position in New Jersey by Christie.

ttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con ... 05658.html

Good for New Jersey, bad for DC.

[MisanthropicPopulism]

No, it's not. Reagamerica on the other hand is.

[Jehnova]

Screw these kids and their communist parents that are borking our systems, I if they want food so badly they can have my table scraps. I shouldn't have to pay taxes just to feed common street rodents, if these kids really want a decent meal, they should bitch to their beatnick parents. They should realize that if they just get off their asses and get a job, they wouldn't need this wellfare BS.

[Sibirsky]

That's brilliant.

You do realize that the US was never meant to be a welfare state, correct? You do realize, that self reliance makes for a better, stronger nation, right? You don't? I didn't think so.

[Sibirsky]

That's brilliant.

You do realize that the US was never meant to be a welfare state, correct? You do realize, that self reliance makes for a better, stronger nation, right? You don't? I didn't think so.