- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:47 pm to blackinthesaddle
quote:
oung adult with a entry level job
Not an excuse
quote:
load of student loans
Can be differed until finances change, bs excuse
quote:
no support system from parents.
So, mom and dads fault?
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:48 pm to blackinthesaddle
quote:so wait, it’s now a privilege if your parents weren’t dead or retarded when you were a child? I have non-retarded parent privilege? You’re still speaking to the outliers.
This was not an argument for or against childhood hunger, but a rebuttal to the posters insistence that he was not privileged.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:48 pm to Pecker
The education system's job is to educate children. Numerous studies have shown that hunger leads to negative learning outcomes. It's the best interest of the system to feed the kids to ensure equal outcomes at the highest possible level.
You, the taxpayer, benefit because numerous studies have shown the positive societal benefits of education on almost every measure of societal good: lower crime, higher employment, higher wages, etc.
You, the taxpayer, benefit because numerous studies have shown the positive societal benefits of education on almost every measure of societal good: lower crime, higher employment, higher wages, etc.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:52 pm to Pecker
quote:
I have non-retarded parent privilege?
No problem scrote, my ex is tarded and she is now a pilot....
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:53 pm to LSUWoodworker
The upfront cost will be more than paid for on the back end in the form of lower crime rates, increased employment rates, higher wages, etc.
I don't worry about how SJW's are going to react. I was asked my solution to the issue. The issue is to get as much food into the mouths of hungry children as possible. Demonetizing food stamps/EBT is the best way to do that.
Not sure what about my last suggestion was moralistic.
I don't worry about how SJW's are going to react. I was asked my solution to the issue. The issue is to get as much food into the mouths of hungry children as possible. Demonetizing food stamps/EBT is the best way to do that.
Not sure what about my last suggestion was moralistic.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:56 pm to blackinthesaddle
quote:
The education system's job is to educate children. Numerous studies have shown that hunger leads to negative learning outcomes. It's the best interest of the system to feed the kids to ensure equal outcomes at the highest possible level.
You, the taxpayer, benefit because numerous studies have shown the positive societal benefits of education on almost every measure of societal good: lower crime, higher employment, higher wages, etc.
Yes, eating meals, getting sleep, low stress, a good family support system, etc., all help in learning. It’s not the government’s job to ensure all of these aspects are accounted for. They provide the environment for learning. It’s not their job to raise children.
Increased accountability from parents is what will improve the quality of education children receive. That’s the root cause of the problem. It’s not breakfast.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:56 pm to Pecker
It's a tricky question.
If you define hunger as in not getting proper nutrition and lacking proper parenting with an emphasis on feeding children, then yes.
Sadly, the ones affected by this are innocent kids.
If you define hunger as in not getting proper nutrition and lacking proper parenting with an emphasis on feeding children, then yes.
Sadly, the ones affected by this are innocent kids.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:57 pm to Pecker
quote:
Increased accountability from parents
Sure, but we can't harm innocent children in the process. Love you Peck, but I work in this industry and it is close to my heart.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:58 pm to Pecker
quote:
Well we’re discussing the intentional misrepresentation of the problem. The underlying causes are many, but that wasn’t the purpose of this discussion.
Is it actually a misrepresentation?
1-5 or 1-6 kids have parents that do not consistently get their kids fed. Whatever you call it, a hunger epidemic, lousy parenting, a public policy failure, whatever....it’s still a problem isn’t it?
Posted on 7/11/18 at 1:59 pm to Pecker
quote:
so wait, it’s now a privilege if your parents weren’t dead or retarded when you were a child? I have non-retarded parent privilege? You’re still speaking to the outliers.
There is an advantage to the individual from having two working parents, so yes, that is a privileged position.
There is no good or bad judgment made in the recognition of that privilege. It helps us to recognize our biases when we acknowledge our privileges as compared to others, and can strengthen our arguments or facilitate our understanding of their arguments.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 2:01 pm to LouisianaLady
quote:
Sure, but we can't harm innocent children in the process.
We aren't harming innocent children. Their parents are.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 2:03 pm to Centinel
We don't let innocent children starve or be malnourished because they were born into shitty parents.
I hate those parents as much as anyone, but I'm not punishing a child for that. That opinion will never change. You can do like many here have mentioned - take away the incentive to continue having children, put way more emphasis on birth control/sex education, etc.
But you don't punish children who are already alive.
I hate those parents as much as anyone, but I'm not punishing a child for that. That opinion will never change. You can do like many here have mentioned - take away the incentive to continue having children, put way more emphasis on birth control/sex education, etc.
But you don't punish children who are already alive.
This post was edited on 7/11/18 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 7/11/18 at 2:03 pm to LouisianaLady
quote:
Sure, but we can't harm innocent children in the process. Love you Peck, but I work in this industry and it is close to my heart.
It’s not about harming children. Those children still need assistance.
The problem is that indiscriminate government support (welfare) will only exacerbate the problem. In your attempt to help children you’re actually creating more children who need help.
Why wasn’t “child hunger” an epidemic in the 1960’s?
Posted on 7/11/18 at 2:07 pm to blackinthesaddle
We should get rid of public schools. Why should people with no kids have to subsidize ghetto peoples kids
Make everyone pay for school if they want their kids to go
Second take away the juvenile detention system. If a 12 year old murders someone they should go live with their dad in Angola for life, not go to Juvy and get out in 2 months
Make everyone pay for school if they want their kids to go
Second take away the juvenile detention system. If a 12 year old murders someone they should go live with their dad in Angola for life, not go to Juvy and get out in 2 months
Posted on 7/11/18 at 2:09 pm to Pecker
It's a catch 22. You do nothing to feed the children, you harm them. You feed them, you're enabling the parents. So you choose the lesser of two evils - which is not allowing children to go without food.
There's rampant fraud in the NSLP, but unlike with food stamps or something where it affects adults, it affects children. Even if people get caught lying about their income to get free meals, nothings changes. They switch to full paid, but they could just not pay the school. There's no real repercussions. However.. what do we do? Deny a child a meal?
Shitty parents suck, but this is one issue where the solution isn't just stopping full force because it puts children without food. It isn't our job to feed other people's kids, but we live in a country where we do not believe innocent children should go hungry.
And this is at least ensuring they are getting food, rather than cash.
There's rampant fraud in the NSLP, but unlike with food stamps or something where it affects adults, it affects children. Even if people get caught lying about their income to get free meals, nothings changes. They switch to full paid, but they could just not pay the school. There's no real repercussions. However.. what do we do? Deny a child a meal?
Shitty parents suck, but this is one issue where the solution isn't just stopping full force because it puts children without food. It isn't our job to feed other people's kids, but we live in a country where we do not believe innocent children should go hungry.
And this is at least ensuring they are getting food, rather than cash.
This post was edited on 7/11/18 at 2:11 pm
Posted on 7/11/18 at 2:10 pm to LouisianaLady
quote:
We don't let innocent children starve or be malnourished because they were born into shitty parents.
Ok. But letting innocent children starve is not punishing them. Their parents are.
quote:
But you don't punish children who are already alive.
We're not punishing children. Their parents are.
Do you not understand the distinction here? If you want to make an argument, use the correct language. By saying "we're punishing children!" it becomes nothing more than a hyperbolic appeal to emotion.
The first sentence you used makes a better argument, as in the morality of letting innocent children suffer if resources are available to help them.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 2:10 pm to Pecker
quote:
Why wasn’t “child hunger” an epidemic in the 1960’s?
Who says it wasn’t?
Just because something has been recently identified doesn’t mean that it didn’t exist until it was observed.
quote:
The problem is that indiscriminate government support (welfare) will only exacerbate the problem. In your attempt to help children you’re actually creating more children who need help.
I wouldn’t exactly call it “indiscriminate”. It’s not like you can show up at the food stamp office and say “I’m poor” and get handed a card.
On the other hand, I don’t think that increasing government aid is the problem. This isn’t a resource issue, is a life skills/decision making issue.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 2:12 pm to el Gaucho
quote:
We should get rid of public schools. Why should people with no kids have to subsidize ghetto peoples kids
Make everyone pay for school if they want their kids to go
Second take away the juvenile detention system. If a 12 year old murders someone they should go live with their dad in Angola for life, not go to Juvy and get out in 2 months
Posted on 7/11/18 at 2:14 pm to Centinel
Again, you're not punishing their parents. You're punishing the kids. It doesn't matter whose fault it is. They're kids.
By all means, quit the entire program and then go to a hungry child and tell them "It's mom's fault"
But that doesn't change the issue.
It only starves kids.
By all means, quit the entire program and then go to a hungry child and tell them "It's mom's fault"
But that doesn't change the issue. It only starves kids.
Page 6 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News