Parents Refuse To Feed Their Own Children, Why Should I Have To Foot Their Bill?

Chary · Oct 16, 2019

Free school lunch for poverty level has existed for a while where I am. And if you're above the poverty bracket, yet still legally "poor", you get lunch for a reduced 30 cents. I remember fishing out nickels from the couch cushions and hoping to have enough for lunch that day. My family couldn't afford much back then, but at the very least, I had cheap school lunch, or something bagged from the previous day's leftovers. Yeah, it sucks that we're all probably taxed on those little kiddie lunches, but I'd much MUCH rather pay for taxes with that in mind, rather than consider that a bulk of my tax money is going to adults scamming the system for TANF/SNAP cards. Kids having food is important, and yeah it's bad that the parents can't provide, but that's not the kids' fault. They shouldn't be punished.

yummycake said:
but this little solution of giving kids a peanut butter and jelly sandwich isn't enough

This is just personal experience, but for free breakfast, back when I was a kid, they'd hand out those packaged Smuckers PB&J frozen sandwiches. But, if a kid had a peanut allergy, they'd give them some of the fruit that we got free with lunch instead. It was always slightly off red delicious apples and small bananas, but at least it was something, and an alternative.

WD_GASTER2 · Oct 16, 2019

This topic is ridiculous. People complaining about their taxes feeding kids is insane to me. I heard we spend a million per tomahawk missile but nobody cries bout that. Also unrelated but people seem to love programs that help them out when they know what it is to be down on their luck as well

Deleted member 412537 · Oct 16, 2019

Chary said:
Free school lunch for poverty level has existed for a while where I am. And if you're above the poverty bracket, yet still legally "poor", you get lunch for a reduced 30 cents. I remember fishing out nickels from the couch cushions and hoping to have enough for lunch that day. My family couldn't afford much back then, but at the very least, I had cheap school lunch, or something bagged from the previous day's leftovers. Yeah, it sucks that we're all probably taxed on those little kiddie lunches, but I'd much MUCH rather pay for taxes with that in mind, rather than consider that a bulk of my tax money is going to adults scamming the system for TANF/SNAP cards. Kids having food is important, and yeah it's bad that the parents can't provide, but that's not the kids' fault. They shouldn't be punished.

This is just personal experience, but for free breakfast, back when I was a kid, they'd hand out those packaged Smuckers PB&J frozen sandwiches. But, if a kid had a peanut allergy, they'd give them some of the fruit that we got free with lunch instead. It was always slightly off red delicious apples and small bananas, but at least it was something, and an alternative.

Fruit for breakfast, huh? It was mostly cold cereal at my school. If I knew about my raw fruit allergy back in the day as a child, then I wouldn't be able to eat those either..its nice that those offers exist though.

RHOPKINS13 · Oct 16, 2019

The question is not whether or not you should have to foot the bill. Obviously you shouldn't, you weren't the one that decided to have kids you couldn't afford to support, or decided to blow money on other luxuries rather than food.

The real question, is whether those kids should have to suffer and/or be responsible for their parent's actions. And the answer is equally as obvious: No!

Quite frankly I'm tired of seeing our government waste billions of tax dollars on stuff the general public either doesn't want or doesn't need. I have very little problem with my tax dollars going to feed somebody else's kids. We can take a second look at that problem after we cut spending in other places where it's not needed, and while we're at it get rid of these tax loopholes that only benefit the mega-rich.

billapong · Oct 16, 2019

WD_GASTER2 said:
This topic is ridiculous. People complaining about their taxes feeding kids is insane to me. I heard we spend a million per tomahawk missile but nobody cries bout that. Also unrelated but people seem to love programs that help them out when they know what it is to be down on their luck as well

They aren't my kids. I shouldn't have to pay for feed other peoples children. I don't mind tax money going to protect the nation or help the army defend the nation, but I don't want to be spending money on feeding other peoples children when it's their responsibility. Parents need to take responsibility for their own children. They aren't mine. I didn't make them. It's not my job to feed every hungry person in the world, especially ones that are simply hungry because their parents are refusing to food them when they are completely able to do so.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

RHOPKINS13 said:
The question is not whether or not you should have to foot the bill. Obviously you shouldn't, you weren't the one that decided to have kids you couldn't afford to support, or decided to blow money on other luxuries rather than food.

The real question, is whether those kids should have to suffer and/or be responsible for their parent's actions. And the answer is equally as obvious: No!

Quite frankly I'm tired of seeing our government waste billions of tax dollars on stuff the general public either doesn't want or doesn't need. I have very little problem with my tax dollars going to feed somebody else's kids. We can take a second look at that problem after we cut spending in other places where it's not needed, and while we're at it get rid of these tax loopholes that only benefit the mega-rich.

I don't want the kids to suffer either, but holding their parents responsible by billing them for the food they do eat isn't shaming the kids nor is feeding them stuff they rather not eat. So what, a 8 year old doesn't like his food. Boo hoo. He or she has food and has it because my taxes are paying for it, because the parents refuse to feed their own kids. That's fine, but I want my money back. I want the parents held responsible. You know what happens when you don't pay back the Government? They withhold money from your paycheck.

I'm all for the school system taking the money it cost them to feed the children whose parents refused to do so out of the parents paychecks. What I'm not willing to do is simply pay for everyone to eat when THEY ARE NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY. By simply paying everyone's school lunch bill we're encouraging these parents to continue to be bad parents. Giving them handouts out of my paycheck is not the answer, because the shit isn't free. I'm paying for it WHEN THEY SHOULD BE.

I'll never vote to support a nationwide free lunch program, because there's no such thing as a free lunch. What I would vote for is to punish the children's parents and would support charging them with child abuse and neglect. I'd have no problem with the Government taking money directly from their paychecks or going into their houses and taking their HDTV's, video games, smart phones, fancy clothes or anything else with value to compensate for the fact they are child abusing pieces of shit.

Deleted User · Oct 16, 2019

would of been Good message... destroyed by you making it political and ignoring real world problems which are complex. Kiss any discussion goodbye because this is getting fairly boring at this point with this liberal=evil. I can say the exact same for your side. Republican=evil. But that misses the entire point, here's a question. Liberals are defined by a person taking a certain stance. Now, let's use something called the human condition. Which that we all have empathy, including liberals because they too are human (and same with republicans) in some form or another because we have common experiences, aka hunger, anger sadness so on. So what parent, which I must add you had to make political force your biased views into this post, would wish this upon their child. And if the child Oh wait, right none. Most parents, regardless of political belief wouldn't. But of course you just had to take the liberal=evil stance.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Might as well add on this parents may or may not even have a choice since minimum wage is not livable wage. It could very well come down to, do you go to work aka use the car (which involves gas money obliviously) keep the house, or give the kid money so they can eat for that one day at school

FAST6191 · Oct 16, 2019

billapong said:
They aren't my kids. I shouldn't have to pay for feed other peoples children. I don't mind tax money going to protect the nation or help the army defend the nation, but I don't want to be spending money on feeding other peoples children when it's their responsibility. Parents need to take responsibility for their own children. They aren't mine. I didn't make them. It's not my job to feed every hungry person in the world, especially ones that are simply hungry because their parents are refusing to food them when they are completely able to do so.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I don't want the kids to suffer either, but holding their parents responsible by billing them for the food they do eat isn't shaming the kids nor is feeding them stuff they rather not eat. So what, a 8 year old doesn't like his food. Boo hoo. He or she has food and has it because my taxes are paying for it, because the parents refuse to feed their own kids. That's fine, but I want my money back. I want the parents held responsible. You know what happens when you don't pay back the Government? They withhold money from your paycheck.

I'm all for the school system taking the money it cost them to feed the children whose parents refused to do so out of the parents paychecks. What I'm not willing to do is simply pay for everyone to eat when THEY ARE NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY. By simply paying everyone's school lunch bill we're encouraging these parents to continue to be bad parents. Giving them handouts out of my paycheck is not the answer, because the shit isn't free. I'm paying for it WHEN THEY SHOULD BE.

I'll never vote to support a nationwide free lunch program, because there's no such thing as a free lunch. What I would vote for is to punish the children's parents and would support charging them with child abuse and neglect. I'd have no problem with the Government taking money directly from their paychecks or going into their houses and taking their HDTV's, video games, smart phones, fancy clothes or anything else with value to compensate for the fact they are child abusing pieces of shit.

Yet you pay for roads for others to drive on, the military you seem to proudly proclaim support for is massively overfunded for what you get in return (if you want to talk about pork barrels...) , you pay for healthcare for others, you pay for education for said kids and that list goes on an on.

If you want to try to advocate for some minimalist approach to tax and government spending then so be it but acting like it is not a fairly radical position to take in the modern world is odd.

As far as parents should be taking responsibility then sure. Highly encourage that one. Do we not want to be there for those that fall through the cracks though? Also why do you imagine they are all sitting there with luxury goods while their kids starve (or at least go malnourished)?

billapong · Oct 16, 2019

FAST6191 said:
Yet you pay for roads for others to drive on, the military you seem to proudly proclaim support for is massively overfunded for what you get in return (if you want to talk about pork barrels...) , you pay for healthcare for others, you pay for education for said kids and that list goes on an on.

If you want to try to advocate for some minimalist approach to tax and government spending then so be it but acting like it is not a fairly radical position to take in the modern world is odd.

As far as parents should be taking responsibility then sure. Highly encourage that one. Do we not want to be there for those that fall through the cracks though? Also why do you imagine they are all sitting there with luxury goods while their kids starve (or at least go malnourished)?

You see, I use the roads that I drive on. I don't paying paying for something that benefits me or I'm remotely involved in or is my responsibility.

We already have systems in place for very low income parents, but the majority of the parents refusing to feed their children are simply doing so when they can afford to pay the bills, but simply don't want to. I'm addressing the parents simply refusing to because they don't want to. If you're a low income parent you simply need to provide documentation to the Schools to get reduced or free food for your children. That's fine, that's already taxed and payed for.

I'm directly addressing freeloading scum that think that passing another Socialism leading law is going to make the situation any better. Passing a national free lunch program is support these terrible parents who don't want to feed their kids be even worse parents. The end goal is socialism, but in the meantime laws like these only support bad parenting and encourage people to not take responsibility for their own, which in turn will instill these terrible values into the children who then think everything should be a handout and that they don't need to work or do anything and that everyone should just give them free shit. It's a cycle that I do not want to support.

WD_GASTER2 · Oct 16, 2019

“If it don’t benefit me, why should I pay into it?” welcome to living in a first world society where we try our best to help each other out.

billapong · Oct 16, 2019

WD_GASTER2 said:
“If it don’t benefit me, why should I pay into it?” welcome to living in a first world society where we try our best to help each other out.

You're not going to make me feel bad. If I had children I would fucking feed them. I am willing to help people that are willing to help themselves. I'm not willing to help people be bad parents and abuse their children. That's something I'll never be willingly a part of. You're labeling me the bad guy when the fucking parents are the society leeching pieces of shit that aren't willing to help themselves let alone their own children.

WD_GASTER2 · Oct 16, 2019

I am not. I am merely notifying you what part living of a society entails. Nobody is trying to hurt your feelings. For context, how many children’s meals do you think one of Trumps trips to mar a lago would pay for? It’s a matter of perspective, I suppose

Hanafuda · Oct 16, 2019

I'm not opposed to school lunch. I'm a little opposed to public school in general, but if you're gonna have public school then there should be a meal provided during the day. The problem with providing that meal, the Catch-22 if you will, is then a lot of deadbeat parents feel they don't need to feed their kids anything. My wife's a kindergarten teacher and sees this a lot. The free school lunch is the only meal the kid gets, period. These parents will even send a letter to the school asking for financial assistance when the school asks for a $5 contribution for a field trip. But they have cars, cellphones, and drug habits. That's the problem with welfare of any kind in the long run ... it just subsidizes poor uses of money. Law prohibits buying tobacco and alcohol with food stamps, but because they get food stamps they can use their cash to get the smokes and whiskey anyway. And lottery tickets. And drugs. The people who make those choices ... and there are a lot of them ... always put their kids last. Giving their kid a free meal everyday just makes it easier for them.

Kurt91 · Oct 16, 2019

I'm pretty sure that with most public schools, or at least the ones I went to because I fell under "too poor to afford lunch", it's set up so that you get lunch for free if you're considered below the poverty line, and at a reduced cost if you make under a certain amount for the number of kids you have enrolled in school.

Thing is, aren't schools funded by the government? So, let's say that you do NOT fall under those categories and you get lunch for the normal price. (I'm going to not include the "reduced-but-not-free" lunch group, because if you're that poor, you're still probably in a situation where something like a minor medical problem is a crippling financial emergency) If you have a bill by the end of the year, why not have the government apply that to your tax returns? Hell, we can even be nicer about it and make it a payment-based thing, so the bill is split across something like five to ten years, and each payment is applied to the corresponding tax return, so it ends up being an insanely minor cost individually.

The thing is, if we're going to work on fixing issues with schools as far as money and funding goes, my big thing is that there needs to be a cap on how much a school is allowed to spend on each department based on the number of students attending that school. (not grades, because then you have the schools possibly trying to game the system)

The high school that I went to had gone so far as to eliminate pretty much every single elective class, and spent just about all of the school's funding on the football team. There was no extra funding for electives, and even the other school groups and teams relied on volunteers and fundraisers to get to do anything. (I would know, my family WERE those volunteers.)

If there was a cap on each department, then you wouldn't have schools gutting some parts to play favorites with others.

Deleted User · Oct 16, 2019

Hanafuda said:
I'm not opposed to school lunch. I'm a little opposed to public school in general, but if you're gonna have public school then there should be a meal provided during the day. The problem with providing that meal, the Catch-22 if you will, is then a lot of deadbeat parents feel they don't need to feed their kids anything. My wife's a kindergarten teacher and sees this a lot. The free school lunch is the only meal the kid gets, period. These parents will even send a letter to the school asking for financial assistance when the school asks for a $5 contribution for a field trip. But they have cars, cellphones, and drug habits. That's the problem with welfare of any kind in the long run ... it just subsidizes poor uses of money. Law prohibits buying tobacco and alcohol with food stamps, but because they get food stamps they can use their cash to get the smokes and whiskey anyway. And lottery tickets. And drugs. The people who make those choices ... and there are a lot of them ... always put their kids last.

Not as many compared to those that are actually poor, who do try to managed their money but are inable to do so because I'll state again. Miniumwage is not livable wage.

sarkwalvein · Oct 16, 2019

Crying for money?
Not me. Not my type.
I couldn't give less fucks.
If the money improves my environment in some way it makes sense to me.
I will, like I am, reap what I saw everyday.

Nickels?
Hit me with something that hurts... like time, yeah time is the real deal.
They say time is gold... but that is a terrible underestimation of the value of time.

billapong · Oct 16, 2019

WD_GASTER2 said:
I am not. I am merely notifying you what part living of a society entails. Nobody is trying to hurt your feelings. For context, how many children’s meals do you think one of Trumps trips to mar a lago would pay for? It’s a matter of perspective, I suppose

How many meals would that iPhone that the kids parents paid $800 for buy for their kids? How about that HDTV? Those Nike's? The daily $50 sack of weed? Those 12 packs of beer? The $30 they spend on themselves at McDonalds? The makeup? It's the parents responsibility to feed their own children not mine or yours or Trumps. So you're envious that Trump has money and think since he has it you have a right to it? That's not how it works. It's his money, not yours. Just like how I make money by working, when these lazy pieces of shit sit home all day and bitch about how bad things are and then refuse to feed their kids, yet expect me to feed them. I'm glad to see what sort of person you are and who you support. Welcome to my ignore list.

WD_GASTER2 · Oct 16, 2019

Implying that all poor people live lives of luxury and all have huge TVs and 1000 dollar iPhones. Get real.Also the mar a lago trips are paid by the tax payers on the weekends. Secret service sent when he is there? On tax payers dime. Their meals? Same. Jealousy my foot. Seriously you don’t research stuff much

Lumstar · Oct 16, 2019

Basic food should be part of the school's funding. If attending school is compulsory, then the school taking appropriate care of its students while on campus is a natural part of that obligation.

Hanafuda · Oct 16, 2019

monkeyman4412 said:
Not as many compared to those that are actually poor, who do try to managed their money but are inable to do so because I'll state again. Miniumwage is not livable wage.

You have personal experience to back that up? Cuz my wife does. 17 students in her class this year, 4 are drug babies (mom was on meth or heroin while pregnant) with mental deficiencies. It's not a special-ed kindergarten, special-ed is too full already. Those kids' parents are fucked up, and they made even more fucked up kids. It's common here. Meth & opiates epidemic. She had a kid last year whose father OD'd when he was supposed to be picking the kid up from school.

And the issue isn't that minimum wage isn't a living wage. Minimum wage isn't a family wage. Was never meant to be. Minimum wage is for teenagers with a part-time job flippin burgers after school or on the weekend. If you're still making minimum wage after 25 years old it's probably because you've got a criminal record, a drug habit, or you've fucked up your life some other way. And that's nobody's fault but the fuck-up. And people making minimum wage shouldn't be having children in the first place. That's just irresponsible, like the fact they'd let that happen by definition DQ's them from proper parenting. That's how their kids' life starts getting fucked up in the first place. You don't make enough to support a child? Then don't make a child.

Trashman · Oct 16, 2019

billapong said:
How many meals would that iPhone that the kids parents paid $800 for buy for their kids? How about that HDTV? Those Nike's? The daily $50 sack of weed? Those 12 packs of beer? The $30 they spend on themselves at McDonalds? The makeup? It's the parents responsibility to feed their own children not mine or yours or Trumps. So you're envious that Trump has money and think since he has it you have a right to it? That's not how it works. It's his money, not yours. Just like how I make money by working, when these lazy pieces of shit sit home all day and bitch about how bad things are and then refuse to feed their kids, yet expect me to feed them. I'm glad to see what sort of person you are and who you support. Welcome to my ignore list.

You are ridiculous. Here's my life, get it right, I grew up in a poor family, I had to wonder if I was going to have food the next day as my mother busted her ass off. She didn't smoke, she didn't drink, she bought me little things here and there, but that was it, and those little things was the occasional candy bar, because my school life was crap and she couldn't do anything about it. She didn't go out buying TVs or the next new iphone because it didn't even exist, we stuck with what little we had. She spent every single dollar on either getting to work, or picking me up from school and buying with the little money she had for food and utlites at the apartment. So how was she expected to pay 4 dollars every day in lunches, or nearly 60 dollars per month. I dare you to call her lazy.

Parents Refuse To Feed Their Own Children, Why Should I Have To Foot Their Bill?

Never sleeps

Hated by life itself.

Well-Known Member

Geek

Well-Known Member

Deleted User

Guest

Techromancer

Well-Known Member

Hated by life itself.

Well-Known Member

Hated by life itself.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted User

Guest

There's hope for a Xenosaga port.

Well-Known Member

Hated by life itself.

Princess

Well-Known Member

New Member

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum