You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
You should pack them a lunch from home like a good parent because you don't want them eating the trash they feed to the kids whose parents don't give a shit about them
That doesn't make sense to me. Did you believe that letting government control distribution of like 200 meals every year for every school aged child in the country would result in a healthier diet for them?
To me that sounds like a great way to introduce corruption and feed them cheap trash that just barely reaches the minimum requirements while charging taxpayers like it's pristine farm to table shit.
Death to parasites. Otherwise it WILL be death to us ALL! Just like there are BASIC human rights, there should also be recognized BASIC human RESPONSIBILITIES (personal, NOT for others).
[–]carbonsteel[S]0 points
0 points
0 points
(+0|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
When we decided where to live (or remain) it was with the PRIORITY of placing our kids in a catholic school. They get a great education - and I am confident that they are being taught with the same values that are important to my wife and I. Problematic kids are not tolerated - and they shouldn't be. My wife is a stay at home Mom. These decisions are a huge financial burden that we struggle to find ways to budget. But in the end -- it is one of the best decisions we have ever made and I would encourage EVERYONE to do the same.
As far as the free lunch thing goes --- just another terrible page in the US of situation where laziness is encouraged. Do these parents smoke, have a cell phone, cable tv, internet, drink, nails done, hair colored ?? I'm sure the school could make provisions for SOME type of payment to be made to keep an account current. But someone made the conscious decision to not budget enough money to pay for ANY of their kids school lunch. They kept doing it because they could get away with it ... and now are completely rewarded for it. It disgusts me.
Notice that Oprah didn't do a thing, she's a billionaire right? She could have a staff of hundreds finding and paying for these things and not even make the smallest dent in her $$.
[+]Soyboy690 points0 points0 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]Soyboy690 points
0 points
0 points
(+0|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
Altruism is a slippery slope, Sure it's not making a dent now, so why not just give a bit more, and a little bit more? Then one day things go to shit and your income isn't what it used to be and as a result of that escalating altruism you realized that you've given thousands of random assholes a leg up using money that could have gone to your heirs instead
It's the small scale equivalent to boomers who give willingly money to feed niggers and don't mind them being imported. Nepotism and altruism are mutually exclusive, and of the two nepotism is the only sensible and morally right option.
Rich people never do anything about hungry children, elderly poor, poor downtrodden illegal immigrants, or any other thing they constantly bitch about.
Sort: Top
[–] WORF_MOTORBOATS_TROI 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago
You should pack them a lunch from home like a good parent because you don't want them eating the trash they feed to the kids whose parents don't give a shit about them
[–] Ghetto_Shitlord 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
This. My cousin who was poor as fuck did this. It was like 1.25 a lunch with proper shopping.
Everyone should spend some time poor,it makes you frugal and resourceful!
[–] Sosacms 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
For a while Obama and his husband were trying to ban home lunches. I was slightly conflicted between Government over reach and child obesity.
[–] WORF_MOTORBOATS_TROI 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
That doesn't make sense to me. Did you believe that letting government control distribution of like 200 meals every year for every school aged child in the country would result in a healthier diet for them?
To me that sounds like a great way to introduce corruption and feed them cheap trash that just barely reaches the minimum requirements while charging taxpayers like it's pristine farm to table shit.
[–] thebearfromstartrack ago
Death to parasites. Otherwise it WILL be death to us ALL! Just like there are BASIC human rights, there should also be recognized BASIC human RESPONSIBILITIES (personal, NOT for others).
[–] derram ago
https://files.catbox.moe/4f6pyy.png :
This has been an automated message.
[–] carbonsteel [S] ago (edited ago)
When we decided where to live (or remain) it was with the PRIORITY of placing our kids in a catholic school. They get a great education - and I am confident that they are being taught with the same values that are important to my wife and I. Problematic kids are not tolerated - and they shouldn't be. My wife is a stay at home Mom. These decisions are a huge financial burden that we struggle to find ways to budget. But in the end -- it is one of the best decisions we have ever made and I would encourage EVERYONE to do the same.
As far as the free lunch thing goes --- just another terrible page in the US of situation where laziness is encouraged. Do these parents smoke, have a cell phone, cable tv, internet, drink, nails done, hair colored ?? I'm sure the school could make provisions for SOME type of payment to be made to keep an account current. But someone made the conscious decision to not budget enough money to pay for ANY of their kids school lunch. They kept doing it because they could get away with it ... and now are completely rewarded for it. It disgusts me.
[–] polygeek ago
Motherfuckin' self respect. If you have it.
[–] ilikeskittles ago
You get free lunch, and you get free lunch and you get free lunch and you get free lunch and you get free lunch.
[–] voater-beware 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
Notice that Oprah didn't do a thing, she's a billionaire right? She could have a staff of hundreds finding and paying for these things and not even make the smallest dent in her $$.
[–] Soyboy69 ago (edited ago)
Altruism is a slippery slope, Sure it's not making a dent now, so why not just give a bit more, and a little bit more? Then one day things go to shit and your income isn't what it used to be and as a result of that escalating altruism you realized that you've given thousands of random assholes a leg up using money that could have gone to your heirs instead
It's the small scale equivalent to boomers who give willingly money to feed niggers and don't mind them being imported. Nepotism and altruism are mutually exclusive, and of the two nepotism is the only sensible and morally right option.
[–] ilikeskittles 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
Rich people never do anything about hungry children, elderly poor, poor downtrodden illegal immigrants, or any other thing they constantly bitch about.
[–] sakuramboo ago
No, they need to be put into foster care because the parents can't take care of their own kids.
[–] clamhurt_legbeard ago
Why aren't you homeschooling?