July 12, 20232 yr 5 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: Unreal. They've stuck the landing. Biden should award himself the Medal of Freedom in the next SOTU. You mean the fed?
July 12, 20232 yr 1 minute ago, VanHammersly said: Ok. You tell me. What has Biden specifically done to tamper the rise of inflation?
July 12, 20232 yr 3 minutes ago, Blazehound said: Ok. You tell me. What has Biden specifically done to tamper the rise of inflation? On a scale of 1 to storm the capital, how upset are you that inflation has come down drastically and we're still gaining 200K jobs a month?
July 12, 20232 yr 35 minutes ago, Blazehound said: You mean the fed? So blame Biden for it rising and give credit to the Fed when it eases. Got it.
July 12, 20232 yr 42 minutes ago, Blazehound said: Ok. You tell me. What has Biden specifically done to tamper the rise of inflation?
July 12, 20232 yr On 6/21/2023 at 4:07 PM, toolg said: So at least one of us is happy with higher grocery bills. You could buy something else with the savings, more stocks or something. There is always one I suppose. What savings? Who do you think is paying for the "free" school lunch?
July 12, 20232 yr 15 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: What savings? Who do you think is paying for the "free" school lunch? The school district. So then I'll answer your next question: Yes, I pay the school tax. So then theoretically my school tax will go up, you would say... But don't forget to subtract lunch account administration costs in the equation, and my grocery bills go down... Then at the very least I have to break even. Plus I get the benefit that students aren't going hungry in class, they're able to perform better, (perhaps students will behave better on a satisfied stomach). So overall it's a win for society.
July 12, 20232 yr 3 hours ago, Blazehound said: Ok. You tell me. What has Biden specifically done to tamper the rise of inflation? He hasn't tried to politicize the Fed. That stands in good contrast with the alternative.
July 12, 20232 yr 3 hours ago, toolg said: The school district. So then I'll answer your next question: Yes, I pay the school tax. So then theoretically my school tax will go up, you would say... But don't forget to subtract lunch account administration costs in the equation, and my grocery bills go down... Then at the very least I have to break even. Plus I get the benefit that students aren't going hungry in class, they're able to perform better, (perhaps students will behave better on a satisfied stomach). So overall it's a win for society. Wrong as always
July 12, 20232 yr 3 hours ago, toolg said: The school district. So then I'll answer your next question: Yes, I pay the school tax. So then theoretically my school tax will go up, you would say... But don't forget to subtract lunch account administration costs in the equation, and my grocery bills go down... Then at the very least I have to break even. Plus I get the benefit that students aren't going hungry in class, they're able to perform better, (perhaps students will behave better on a satisfied stomach). So overall it's a win for society. Your grocery bill goes down temporarily during the school year and only until your kids graduate. Your tax goes up for the rest of your life while you live in that school district. Why are students going hungry in class? Is someone forbidding them from taking their scheduled lunch?
July 12, 20232 yr I'm not sure food for children is the hill to die on in combating government waste.
July 12, 20232 yr 43 minutes ago, Gannan said: I'm not sure food for children is the hill to die on in combating government waste. By this logic, why not give every family with children free food for the whole year until the child is 18? Why stop with school? Let’s extend it to weeknights, weekends, and summers. Im not dying on a hill. I’m trying to have an honest discussion about it. What are the real costs and benefits? What problem is it trying to solve? Why does that problem exist? If there’s already existing programs that are supposed to deal with this problem, why are they not working? Does this program address the root cause of that problem? And if not, does throwing more money at it actually solve it or is it a bandaid and are there better ways to use that money?
July 12, 20232 yr 5 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: By this logic, why not give every family with children free food for the whole year until the child is 18? Why stop with school? Let’s extend it to weeknights, weekends, and summers. Im not dying on a hill. I’m trying to have an honest discussion about it. What are the real costs and benefits? What problem is it trying to solve? Why does that problem exist? If there’s already existing programs that are supposed to deal with this problem, why are they not working? Does this program address the root cause of that problem? And if not, does throwing more money at it actually solve it or is it a bandaid and are there better ways to use that money? Before going after food for children, why not oil subsidies, billions for military equipment that is never used, paying farmers billions to NOT grow food, pensions for politicians? I could go on. Do any of those budget items solve anything?
July 12, 20232 yr 4 minutes ago, Gannan said: Before going after food for children, why not oil subsidies, billions for military equipment that is never used, paying farmers billions to NOT grow food, pensions for politicians? I could go on. Do any of those budget items solve anything? I’m not "going after” food for children. Adding facts to a discussion after someone posts about a topic isn’t "going after” it. Toolg posted about school breakfast/lunch programs, he didn’t post about the items you have listed here. It would be weird of me to respond to his post about school lunches by talking about military equipment. however since you asked: 1) I’m not extremely well versed on tax breaks and credits oil companies receive. I would imagine that there are some credits for oil companies that might have made sense at some point but aren’t really needed anymore and should be eliminated. 2) absolutely our military budget is bloated. 100% agreed 3) I think our agriculture policy is the antithesis of the free market and should be completely revamped. The example you posted above is exhibit 1A. 4) hell to the yes we should get rid of pensions for politicians.
July 13, 20232 yr 16 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said: Why are students going hungry in class? Is someone forbidding them from taking their scheduled lunch? Students are going hungry if they don't have any food at home to bring to school and their parents can't pay the school lunch bill. It is simple and economical to feed children in school because they are all congregated in the same place at the same time, for the purpose of education. Economy of scale. The whole process of serving lunch is streamlined if students just line up and get served food. I believe school lunch and nutrition should be a part of their education. Something is not working right if kids are going hungry. Schools can already provide a building, desks to sit at, books, and materials... I feel make school lunches part of the education budget. Also subtract the administration costs of school lunch money accounts. Just feed the kids. It's that simple.
July 13, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, toolg said: Students are going hungry if they don't have any food at home to bring to school and their parents can't pay the school lunch bill. It is simple and economical to feed children in school because they are all congregated in the same place at the same time, for the purpose of education. Economy of scale. The whole process of serving lunch is streamlined if students just line up and get served food. I believe school lunch and nutrition should be a part of their education. Something is not working right if kids are going hungry. Schools can already provide a building, desks to sit at, books, and materials... I feel make school lunches part of the education budget. Also subtract the administration costs of school lunch money accounts. Just feed the kids. It's that simple. And why do they not have any food at home to bring to school? Do we not already have programs that assist lower income families with providing food for their children? I'm not necessarily against making lunch part of the school budget. But there should be a real reason for doing it, and a real discussion on the costs and benefits. (i.e no voodoo economic tales where it's "free" and actually saves people money).
July 13, 20232 yr 21 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: And why do they not have any food at home to bring to school? Do we not already have programs that assist lower income families with providing food for their children? I'm not necessarily against making lunch part of the school budget. But there should be a real reason for doing it, and a real discussion on the costs and benefits. (i.e no voodoo economic tales where it's "free" and actually saves people money). They don't always have food at home if they are food insecure. Kids are already gathered at school for learning. Feed them. It is harder to reach people when they're about their daily lives. I am not showing your voodoo. I am showing real studies that say there is a market response at grocery stores when schools feed the children. Pardon me if you cannot accept that.
July 13, 20232 yr 45 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: And why do they not have any food at home to bring to school? Do we not already have programs that assist lower income families with providing food for their children? I'm not necessarily against making lunch part of the school budget. But there should be a real reason for doing it, and a real discussion on the costs and benefits. (i.e no voodoo economic tales where it's "free" and actually saves people money). Once people have something for free they depend on it. Im not saying its right or wrong, but its a fact. Generations of poor Americans are used to the schools feeding their kids. Poverty and dependence is cyclical. So the parents grew up that way, and now their kids are growing up that way (I know because I've seen it). While it makes sense from a theoretical view for us to sit back on our $2,000 laptops as we screw around at work and say they should do better, the reality is its not politically tenable for a politician to ignore all of the other government waste I pointed out in order to zero in on taking food away form children. It might play with the hard core right wing, but that's about it. Even then, if anything got done and the poor white trash who vote republican started feeling the effects of this, they wouldn't support it for long. So Im not sure what the point is.
July 13, 20232 yr 2 minutes ago, toolg said: They don't always have food at home if they are food insecure. Kids are already gathered at school for learning. Feed them. It is harder to reach people when they're about their daily lives. I am not showing your voodoo. I am showing real studies that say there is a market response at grocery stores when schools feed the children. Pardon me if you cannot accept that. "They don't always have food at home if they are food insecure." What does this mean? And again, why don't they have food at home? "Kids are already gathered at school for learning. Feed them." Again, I'm not necessarily against having lunches be part of the budget. I'm asking why is this needed now? Why aren't parents able to provide lunches for their children? "I am not showing your voodoo. I am showing real studies that say there is a market response at grocery stores when schools feed the children. Pardon me if you cannot accept that." Did you read the study? Or did you just trust what the claims made in the tweet? The study used a model to estimate the change in grocery store revenues and model how chain groceries would respond to drops in revenue. It wasn't a retroactive study of something that actually happened. Additionally, if we're looking at externalities, then one must also examine what happens to employment at those grocery stores. Does the grocery store lay people off due to the drop in revenue? And what effect does that have?
July 13, 20232 yr 41 minutes ago, Gannan said: Once people have something for free they depend on it. Im not saying its right or wrong, but its a fact. Generations of poor Americans are used to the schools feeding their kids. Poverty and dependence is cyclical. So the parents grew up that way, and now their kids are growing up that way (I know because I've seen it). While it makes sense from a theoretical view for us to sit back on our $2,000 laptops as we screw around at work and say they should do better, the reality is its not politically tenable for a politician to ignore all of the other government waste I pointed out in order to zero in on taking food away form children. It might play with the hard core right wing, but that's about it. Even then, if anything got done and the poor white trash who vote republican started feeling the effects of this, they wouldn't support it for long. So Im not sure what the point is. So I'll ask again, if we already have programs to assist poor people in feeding their families, then why are kids going to school hungry as Toolg has presented? It would seem to me the first thing that we should then do is examine why the existing program is failing to do what it's supposed to do before we just throw more money at the problem. "Poverty and dependence is cyclical." And the goal should be to break that cycle. If the way we're doing things isn't working to break that cycle, then we need to ask why that's happening, and then change what we're doing to increase the chance that this cycle is broken. The goal should be for people to get out of poverty, not live in it.
July 13, 20232 yr 4 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: So I'll ask again, if we already have programs to assist poor people in feeding their families, then why are kids going to school hungry as Toolg has presented? It would seem to me the first thing that we should then do is examine why the existing program is failing to do what it's supposed to do before we just throw more money at the problem. "Poverty and dependence is cyclical." And the goal should be to break that cycle. If the way we're doing things isn't working to break that cycle, then we need to ask why that's happening, and then change what we're doing to increase the chance that this cycle is broken. The goal should be for people to get out of poverty, not live in it. I am trying to tell you it is more efficient to feed children where they are present already. Which is in school.
Create an account or sign in to comment