Boston Public Schools Offer "Free" Meals to All Children

[jbombelli]

Let's dispense with this silly argument. Government handouts are not equivalent to your private charitable giving. Let's use a real analogy.

So, he lost his job and can't afford food. Would you come over to my house with a gun, point it in my face, and take food from my family to give to him?

That is a proper analogy to compare to the government redistribution that you are advocating.

This.

How about this question: It's too bad you lost your job...why didn't your save some money for this rainy day?

And this.

And as far as losing my job goes, I got downsized in January. I DID in fact lose my job. I just started a new job last week. But I didn't leech dime #1 off the taxpayer. I had the foresight to set aside money whenever I could. I in fact could have gone another nine months without any income whatsoever. You see, I save my money. It will take me a bit to get back to where I was, and I have to push back my roadster plans, but that's life. My not getting the Backdraft Racing RT3B when I thought I was going to is the biggest inconvenience out of this whole thing.

 

[RockofStrength]

Hey no problem, stop spending on the front end for kids and we WILL pay big time on the back end to prosecute and house them in jail. You may not want to pay to feed the kids but we will pay one way or another. Just call 911 when these kids get turned away by the schools and they decide to start stealing your stuff.

Which is why crime among youth is so low nowadays, clearly. Last I checked they were already stealing people's stuff.

 

[Denny347]

Which is why crime among youth is so low nowadays, clearly. Last I checked they were already stealing people's stuff.

Yes, the problem is getting worse. I have the unique position to patrol the area I live and the schools where my kids attend and on top of that I am an active PTA member. I see it from both sides...the LE side and the school admin side. Trying to get parents to get involved in their kids school is all but impossible. You should see the state of some of these kids when they show up to school. They show up hungry, tired, dirty, and craving attention. NOT ideal for teachers to teach. Like it or not, we cannot make parents give a crap about their kids...so many don't. It's not the child's fault they were born to worthless humans beings. So, the school has to step in and try to band-aid what the parents screwed up so the kid can at least have a SHOT at self improvement. You many not like it but the schools are being put into these positions, it's not the other way around.

 

[HoughMade]

As usual, I'm with Carolla. The issue is not just the use of tax money, it's that one of the worst possible messages to send kids is that the State cares about you more than your parents:

[video=youtube;TZE6fdLigxg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZE6fdLigxg[/video]

 

[Denny347]

As usual, I'm with Carolla. The issue is not just the use of tax money, it's that one of the worst possible messages to send kids is that the State cares about you more than your parents

In many cases it's 100% true. I remember being a rookie and this very young mother GAVE me her infant. She didn't want it anymore. It was a bother to her. It was cold out and the mom did not want the baby to have ANYTHING she bought for him, not even the coat to keep him warm. I (the State) did care more about this child's well being than the mother. I come across situations almost daily that says the same thing, I care more about the kid than the parents. It is a terrible message but it's the truth.

 

[bingley]

In many cases it's 100% true. I remember being a rookie and this very young mother GAVE me her infant. She didn't want it anymore. It was a bother to her. It was cold out and the mom did not want the baby to have ANYTHING she bought for him, not even the coat to keep him warm. I (the State) did care more about this child's well being than the mother. I come across situations almost daily that says the same thing, I care more about the kid than the parents. It is a terrible message but it's the truth.

This is dreadful, Denny. What was wrong with the mother? What made her become so inhuman? What did you do? Could you legally take the baby and get it adopted?

I wonder how you manage to keep working if you see such inhumanity every day.

As for the debate in this thread, it boils down to two approaches:

1. The approach based on the personal good -- *I* shouldn't have to pay for what *I* am not responsible for. Social and financial planning should be made according to that standard, and if people starve, take to crime, create mass social problems and turn our country into the bad parts of South Africa, let them. They are the problem. With all the money I'll save under this system, I'll be able to afford a "tactical" compound, guns, ammo, and armored vehicles that shoot out fire from the side to fight off carjackers.

2. The approach based on the social good -- I'm willing to pay extra so the society as a whole has a better chance, even if that means bailing out some worthless human beings. I regard this as some sort of "preventive care," so there would be fewer criminals. I see the problem as the problem of the whole society, and the best way to make my own life better is to make the lives of the irresponsible and the helpless people better -- better enough that they won't cause cost me further. If I don't do this, I'll end up paying to lock up & feed a huge population.

I don't think there is a compromise unless people come to agreement as to what the problem is. If you care only for your tribe, you're likely to pick 1. If your tribe is bigger than the traditional sense of the word, you're likely to pick 2.

 

[Denny347]

This is dreadful, Denny. What was wrong with the mother? What made her become so inhuman? What did you do? Could you legally take the baby and get it adopted?

I wonder how you manage to keep working if you see such inhumanity every day.

As for the debate in this thread, it boils down to two approaches:

1. The approach based on the personal good -- *I* shouldn't have to pay for what *I* am not responsible for. Social and financial planning should be made according to that standard, and if people starve, take to crime, create mass social problems and turn our country into the bad parts of South Africa, let them. They are the problem. With all the money I'll save under this system, I'll be able to afford a "tactical" compound, guns, ammo, and armored vehicles that shoot out fire from the side to fight off carjackers.

2. The approach based on the social good -- I'm willing to pay extra so the society as a whole has a better chance, even if that means bailing out some worthless human beings. I regard this as some sort of "preventive care," so there would be fewer criminals. I see the problem as the problem of the whole society, and the best way to make my own life better is to make the lives of the irresponsible and the helpless people better -- better enough that they won't cause cost me further. If I don't do this, I'll end up paying to lock up & feed a huge population.

I don't think there is a compromise unless people come to agreement as to what the problem is. If you care only for your tribe, you're likely to pick 1. If your tribe is bigger than the traditional sense of the word, you're likely to pick 2.

I tell you that I'm much more cynical now that I was before getting into this field. The child was sadly better off with DCS and I am sure was adopted. We CHINS (Child In Need Of Services) kids in those situations and let DCS figure the rest out. What I see is a cycle of poverty. These young people grow up with non-caring parents (parent) and never saw what a loving parent/child relationship was. They grow up with no expectation of self betterment, even worse, they are chastised by family for liking school. They are only pushed to be "street smart" and no value is given to school. I am still amazed that ANY child breaks out of this cycle considering that their entire social network has been pushing them in the other direction since birth. Finding a way to connect with these children and instill a sense of self worth is the largest problem we have.

 

[actaeon277]

This is dreadful, Denny. What was wrong with the mother? What made her become so inhuman? What did you do? Could you legally take the baby and get it adopted?

I wonder how you manage to keep working if you see such inhumanity every day.

As for the debate in this thread, it boils down to two approaches:

1. The approach based on the personal good -- *I* shouldn't have to pay for what *I* am not responsible for. Social and financial planning should be made according to that standard, and if people starve, take to crime, create mass social problems and turn our country into the bad parts of South Africa, let them. They are the problem. With all the money I'll save under this system, I'll be able to afford a "tactical" compound, guns, ammo, and armored vehicles that shoot out fire from the side to fight off carjackers.

2. The approach based on the social good -- I'm willing to pay extra so the society as a whole has a better chance, even if that means bailing out some worthless human beings. I regard this as some sort of "preventive care," so there would be fewer criminals. I see the problem as the problem of the whole society, and the best way to make my own life better is to make the lives of the irresponsible and the helpless people better -- better enough that they won't cause cost me further. If I don't do this, I'll end up paying to lock up & feed a huge population.

I don't think there is a compromise unless people come to agreement as to what the problem is. If you care only for your tribe, you're likely to pick 1. If your tribe is bigger than the traditional sense of the word, you're likely to pick 2.

As usual, you left out an option.
It's the, "I shouldn't be FORCED to hand over part of my paycheck, but am perfectly willing to VOLUNTARILY donate some of my money to PRIVATE charity" option.
I donate to various charities. I can check out each charity. How much of my money actually goes to whom I intend it. And how much goes to overhead. And who does it go to.
Government charity.... I can't determine ANY of that.

 

[mrjarrell]

Is everyone who's against this particular misuse of stolen tax dollars just as outraged about tax dollars being given to corporations and the military/industrial complex? Does it outrage you that Raytheon and McDonald-Douglas are receiving billions as much as it enrages you that some kid's getting a peanut butter sandwich? This one really doesn't rate high on my outrage-o-meter compared to the other billions that are given out in corporate welfare and feeding the war machine.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Is everyone who's against this particular misuse of stolen tax dollars just as outraged about tax dollars being given to corporations and the military/industrial complex? Does it outrage you that Raytheon and McDonald-Douglas are receiving billions as much as it enrages you that some kid's getting a peanut butter sandwich? This one really doesn't rate high on my outrage-o-meter compared to the other billions that are given out in corporate welfare and feeding the war machine.

Probably. And when abuses and fraud related to them are brought up, I'm sure they'll be roundly criticized. For the record, I am equally against corporations, farmers, small businessmen, and all other groups and individuals receiving welfare.

 

[Denny347]

Is everyone who's against this particular misuse of stolen tax dollars just as outraged about tax dollars being given to corporations and the military/industrial complex? Does it outrage you that Raytheon and McDonald-Douglas are receiving billions as much as it enrages you that some kid's getting a peanut butter sandwich? This one really doesn't rate high on my outrage-o-meter compared to the other billions that are given out in corporate welfare and feeding the war machine.

Defense has become corporate welfare on a grand scale. Same with agriculture. Shameful

 

[HoughMade]

Define for me what you believe "corporate welfare" is. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but I want to know what people think it is.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Define for me what you believe "corporate welfare" is. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but I want to know what people think it is.

Just a couple of easy examples:
When the government "invested" in GM to help through its bankruptcy, that is corporate welfare.
When the government "invests" in solar companies to advance a "green energy" agenda, that is corporate welfare.

 

[HoughMade]

Just a couple of easy examples:
When the government "invested" in GM to help through its bankruptcy, that is corporate welfare.

In a way, I agree. They got an opportunity that another corporation would not get, that is true. However, the loans were repaid and the government owns stock which presumably, it could sell for value, so how much the government actually paid out, remains to be seen. One could argue that one large recipient of the "corporate welfare" are the employees who still have jobs. So, I'll agree with this example, overall.

When the government "invests" in solar companies to advance a "green energy" agenda, that is corporate welfare.

I agree with this example without caveat. This seems to be a direct federal prop-up of companies without market support.

 

[Denny347]

Define for me what you believe "corporate welfare" is. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but I want to know what people think it is.

It's a bit dated so the numbers will be different (likely more) but the concept is still the same.
Corporate Welfare for Weapons Makers: The Hidden Costs of Spending on Defense and Foreign Aid | Cato Institute

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

In a way, I agree. They got an opportunity that another corporation would not get, that is true. However, the loans were repaid and the government owns stock which presumably, it could sell for value, so how much the government actually paid out, remains to be seen. One could argue that one large recipient of the "corporate welfare" are the employees who still have jobs. So, I'll agree with this example, overall.



I agree with this example without caveat. This seems to be a direct federal prop-up of companies without market support.

In full disclosure, I am a GM employee. GM received benefit of the taxpayers' hard work to save them from a fate that they brought on themselves. They achieved their status of part ownership (at least in part) by coercing bond holders to remove themselves from the front of the liquidation line. I'd better stop there...

 

[bingley]

As usual, you left out an option.
It's the, "I shouldn't be FORCED to hand over part of my paycheck, but am perfectly willing to VOLUNTARILY donate some of my money to PRIVATE charity" option.

As usual, you misunderstand. I didn't leave that out. That modality of social action goes under 1. I'm not looking at this as government policy. I'm looking at the underlying social attitudes that produced different solutions. The main difference between 1 and 2 is the individual's relationship to the group.

I am pessimistic about human nature. Mankind is not a generous species. Look at the countries with no welfare system. The poor, no matter how hard they work, no matter how "personally responsible" they are, are kept poor generation after generation. There is often no charity. Those countries tend to be 1, and their population can be tribal, or at least they're defined by close-knit families. Why give any money to outsiders? Now, some of those countries are prosperous, some are poor. In other words, this is not some sort of magic formula that'd get wealth for any country. For those of you who think I'm advocating welfare, consider this: there is no rule in the universe that says we can't exploit the poor for all they're worth.

You belong to 1. People who belong to 2 would not see it as "forced charity." It's insurance for their own future.

 

[bingley]

I tell you that I'm much more cynical now that I was before getting into this field. The child was sadly better off with DCS and I am sure was adopted. We CHINS (Child In Need Of Services) kids in those situations and let DCS figure the rest out. What I see is a cycle of poverty. These young people grow up with non-caring parents (parent) and never saw what a loving parent/child relationship was. They grow up with no expectation of self betterment, even worse, they are chastised by family for liking school. They are only pushed to be "street smart" and no value is given to school. I am still amazed that ANY child breaks out of this cycle considering that their entire social network has been pushing them in the other direction since birth. Finding a way to connect with these children and instill a sense of self worth is the largest problem we have.

I'm glad you were there to help break the cycle, Denny.