New Mexico bans "Lunch shaming"

[Wansul]

Help people with lunches if they can't afford it? Yeah!


But forbidding freedom of speech on your veiws on it is a for me. I don't support doing it, and Inthink people who do it are jerks. But banning people from staying stuff? Really, that violates first admenment.

[New Werpland]

Why not? Children do not have freedom of speech.

[Cepcecic Ghost]

Enforcement would be difficult, but, if it's possible, I'm all in.

[Donut section]

The stamps a bit pointless. As is throwing the food out. But I don't see a problem with having to clean the cafeteria for food.

It's the same demeaning treatment and servers absolutely no purpose. The child is there to learn, and to eat, not to clean the fucking cafeteria.

Are you kidding? There's two immensely important life lessons here. Some people have more than others and a bit of extra effort is sometimes required.

[Risottia]

I guess the families applying for free or discounted lunch can just show the school their tax forms. Not a lot of bureaucracy, and you can do it over the internet nowadays.

Someone at the school still has to process that info.

Doesn't look like a terrible fuss.

[Risottia]

No.
Have a progressive system with pre-paid lunch tickets instead. The kids from lowest-income families get them for free. Kids from low-income get a discount, and kids from middle-to-high income pay for the full price. But no money at school: only pre-paid tickets.

You're right about the part "no money to the school" but I don't think there should be tickets or something like that.
I don't think it could work fine.
ALL children should have free meals at the school, including rich kids.
Middle-to-high income families should pay through taxation, never directly for the meals, the meals should be for free, and meant as a right of all children while being at school.

That would be even better, but I'm afraid the anti-spending types would put up some fight.

[Risottia]

I guess the families applying for free or discounted lunch can just show the school their tax forms. Not a lot of bureaucracy, and you can do it over the internet nowadays.

You now need an administrative department to process that tax returns deciding to apply the rules based on the parent's marital status, estrangement, irregular income etc and chase after parents who haven't submitted their returns in time. Additionally you also need another person performing batch check to make sure people are actually submitting their own tax returns and other frauds. You also need to continue maintaining the payment system, including the whole pre ticket system, hire cashiers etc.
Or you just give everyone free lunch; lets say it costs $10 for one student's lunch and 200 day school year - that's $2000 per student per annum. Hiring a cashier will cost $17k Hiring one person to process and enter those information into the system will cost $27k. If we just take these as a cost of the system, a school would need to have 2,200 fully paying students to break even.

Or you could do like we in Italy do: our tax agency and our retirement agency directly issues a declaration about the general economic situation of the household. This declaration can be used directly to access to any kind of welfare service. Ah, of course it's released via an automated system so you can file it and get it verified over the internet. Way easier, costs a lot less.

[Imperializt Russia]

It's the same demeaning treatment and servers absolutely no purpose. The child is there to learn, and to eat, not to clean the fucking cafeteria.

Are you kidding? There's two immensely important life lessons here. Some people have more than others and a bit of extra effort is sometimes required.

"Your parents are poor, so we're going to let civilisation shit on you because of it, you useless fuck. Get scrubbing"

-Donutian education mantra.

[Imperializt Russia]

Help people with lunches if they can't afford it? Yeah!


But forbidding freedom of speech on your veiws on it is a for me. I don't support doing it, and Inthink people who do it are jerks. But banning people from staying stuff? Really, that violates first admenment.

freedumb of speesh!

"Freedom of speech" isn't licence to just say whatever shit passes through your head. What this law is in relation to, is to stop school administrators from using methods to publicly identify and/or shame children who cannot afford school meals and have accounts run empty or physically not afford them.

Methods include, a hand-stamp, having your meal thrown away for daring to try and have one, and being forced to perform medial labour to "work" for a meal.
These are cruel and demeaning punishments for the crime of being poor and hungry, in a school of all fucking places.

This is not "freedumb of speesh". It's not even about fucking speech.

[Idzequitch]

It's the same demeaning treatment and servers absolutely no purpose. The child is there to learn, and to eat, not to clean the fucking cafeteria.

Are you kidding? There's two immensely important life lessons here. Some people have more than others and a bit of extra effort is sometimes required.

Kids are not meant to be financially responsible for themselves, including working for their meals. Forcing them to work for the school, just because their parents don't have money, is not only deplorable and unethical, but it practically invites bullying from other kids, and distracts from the actual purpose of school. You know, the whole learning thing?

[Thermodolia]

Lunch shaming is a thing?

[The Black Forrest]

Lunch shaming is a thing?

Yup. In California, my kids school had to start clamping down on it as many kids are on assistance and actually get a set meal so you know who they are.....

[Donut section]

Are you kidding? There's two immensely important life lessons here. Some people have more than others and a bit of extra effort is sometimes required.

Kids are not meant to be financially responsible for themselves, including working for their meals. Forcing them to work for the school, just because their parents don't have money, is not only deplorable and unethical, but it practically invites bullying from other kids, and distracts from the actual purpose of school. You know, the whole learning thing?

What, like life lessons, that are better instilled early. Or would you rather they end up socialists "I don't have to do anything cause someone else can always look after me."

Fuck that noise.

[Imperializt Russia]

Kids are not meant to be financially responsible for themselves, including working for their meals. Forcing them to work for the school, just because their parents don't have money, is not only deplorable and unethical, but it practically invites bullying from other kids, and distracts from the actual purpose of school. You know, the whole learning thing?

What, like life lessons, that are better instilled early. Or would you rather they end up socialists "I don't have to do anything cause someone else can always look after me."

Fuck that noise.

1) not socialism
2) learn what socialism is

[The Black Forrest]

Kids are not meant to be financially responsible for themselves, including working for their meals. Forcing them to work for the school, just because their parents don't have money, is not only deplorable and unethical, but it practically invites bullying from other kids, and distracts from the actual purpose of school. You know, the whole learning thing?

What, like life lessons, that are better instilled early. Or would you rather they end up socialists "I don't have to do anything cause someone else can always look after me."

Fuck that noise.

Your edgy bending will not work here.

[Donut section]

What, like life lessons, that are better instilled early. Or would you rather they end up socialists "I don't have to do anything cause someone else can always look after me."

Fuck that noise.

1) not socialism
2) learn what socialism is

1) what socialism amounts to
2) text book definitions rarely match reality, so go learn what socialism is

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Kids are not meant to be financially responsible for themselves, including working for their meals. Forcing them to work for the school, just because their parents don't have money, is not only deplorable and unethical, but it practically invites bullying from other kids, and distracts from the actual purpose of school. You know, the whole learning thing?

What, like life lessons, that are better instilled early. Or would you rather they end up socialists "I don't have to do anything cause someone else can always look after me."

Fuck that noise.

So rich kids end up being socialists?

Who would have thought.

[Idzequitch]

Kids are not meant to be financially responsible for themselves, including working for their meals. Forcing them to work for the school, just because their parents don't have money, is not only deplorable and unethical, but it practically invites bullying from other kids, and distracts from the actual purpose of school. You know, the whole learning thing?

What, like life lessons, that are better instilled early. Or would you rather they end up socialists "I don't have to do anything cause someone else can always look after me."

Fuck that noise.

That you have to lie down and take abuse from people because you/your parents are poor is the noise that should be fucked.

[British Prussia]

I'm not American, but surely parents should be able to pay for a lunch. I don't agree the state should be paying up at all. I mean public schools are already free if not vastly subsidised.

[MERIZoC]

Or would you rather they end up socialists.

Yes

[The Black Forrest]

I'm not American, but surely parents should be able to pay for a lunch. I don't agree the state should be paying up at all. I mean public schools are already free if not vastly subsidised.

Not the case at all. There are many instances where the lunch is the most the kid gets to eat in a day. In my particular area standard of living is rather high.

[Pope Joan]

I don't think this can effectively be enforced and thus I'm against this. Enduring simple bullying builds character and lunch is optional. I didn't have it for nearly the entire duration of K-12. So far as lunch being the only source of food for some children, give me a break. Even the lowest incomes can afford food, that is part of the point of minimum wage. It is almost a given that if a child isn't getting any food at home, that they'd eventually wind up getting removed from that home by the state.

It is not much more expensive to just feed all the kids a free lunch, then it is to monitor and enforce the current free lunch program.
I have seen this done, and it works well. No stigma.

[Lost Memories]

The number of times someone is wounded doesn't improve their healing ability.
"Building character" is not improved by being harmed more often.

If you learn to stand up against being bullied, it certainly builds character. If you don't do anything about it though it can have some pretty negative effects on your development.

My point was, who's going to stand up to bullying will be able to do so regardless of being bullied or not, while some others will just be the receiving end of the bullying.

Because "Character" isn't built from being bullied, who already has "character" is able to stand up right away, and who doesn't isn't able.
"Character" is actually built from any experience, both good and bad, but someone "learning to stand up" only because of being bullied, is as warped and wounded as someone who wasn't able to defend themselves.

Bullying only generates a wound (emotive or also physical), learning to defend against it doesn't "build character", it's just a passive-aggressive reaction to an aggressive behavior.

[Serrus]

I don't think this can effectively be enforced and thus I'm against this. Enduring simple bullying builds character and lunch is optional. I didn't have it for nearly the entire duration of K-12. So far as lunch being the only source of food for some children, give me a break. Even the lowest incomes can afford food, that is part of the point of minimum wage. It is almost a given that if a child isn't getting any food at home, that they'd eventually wind up getting removed from that home by the state.

It is not much more expensive to just feed all the kids a free lunch, then it is to monitor and enforce the current free lunch program.
I have seen this done, and it works well. No stigma.

I don't know about the rest of America, but we get free lunch and breakfast/snacks (aka unopened breakfast items) at our school.

[Wansul]

Help people with lunches if they can't afford it? Yeah!


But forbidding freedom of speech on your veiws on it is a for me. I don't support doing it, and Inthink people who do it are jerks. But banning people from staying stuff? Really, that violates first admenment.

freedumb of speesh!

"Freedom of speech" isn't licence to just say whatever shit passes through your head. What this law is in relation to, is to stop school administrators from using methods to publicly identify and/or shame children who cannot afford school meals and have accounts run empty or physically not afford them.

Methods include, a hand-stamp, having your meal thrown away for daring to try and have one, and being forced to perform medial labour to "work" for a meal.
These are cruel and demeaning punishments for the crime of being poor and hungry, in a school of all fucking places.

This is not "freedumb of speesh". It's not even about fucking speech.

Ohh.
I though it meant that other kids were saying stuff like "You can't afford it? Ha ha!" Which is kinda jerky but should still be allowed. Forcing people to do stuff for like you mentioned is a big no no. Is that even legal? Forcing kids to do stuff like that.

"Freedom of speech" isn't licence to just say whatever shit passes through your head.

Actually yes it kinda is.