"free" school breakfasts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: it all detracts from the schools mission which is to teach. If school’s returned to that mission, the education they provide would improve. Thus I’m not P-ing vinegar… I’m offering solutions that will actually help.

They can't perform their primary function of teaching if the kids are hungry. In fact, this is what makes the rest of your slippery slope hyperbolic argument nonsensical, because all these hungry people are not being taught by the school, so there is the logical extension to students only.

Why bother buying food and feeding your child if you know the good, rich folks of MoCo will do it for you?

Your argument is that, if there were no free breakfast at school, then the children would get breakfast at home. What if they don't? Before there was free breakfast at school, did all children get breakfast at home? If you canceled free breakfast at school, and 5% of children did not get breakfast at home and therefore went hungry, would you consider that an acceptable percentage? How about 10%? How about 20%? How many children should go hungry to support your principle that parents should provide for children?

We go to a school with 35% FARMS and everyone needs to bring in their own snack in K every day. They teacher does not supply any if you forget. I have volunteered 6 times since school started and never once has a kid forgotten their snack. As a room parent, I asked if we should have backups and the teacher said rarely does a child forget so it is not worth it. If a family realizes there is a backup, then the "forgetting to bring a snack" rises drastically and it isn't always the poor ones.

If a poor family can remember a pre-packaged snack every single day, they can give a kid a bowl of apple-rings in milk ($99 for big-ass bag at Giant)