WTF?

[Woodruff]

Once school food is edible, they can start banning home-brought food.

Granted I went to school a long time ago, but I always liked school food, for the most part.

[Woodruff]

Childhood obesity is really becoming a serious problem in the US, guys.

Absolutely true.

I don't think this is in any way worse than banning certain toys or jewelry from schools (remember those slap bracelets that kids kept accidentally slitting their wrists with?).

Actually, I don't! Egads. Even that being said, that's more of an "obvious, sellable" threat than obesity is, though I agree that obesity is probably more of an actual killer, given that those wrist-slitting incidents were probably relatively rare.

you should have posted this in the "what does liberalism lead to" thread

It would have at least been more appropriate than what is there, yes.

The reason they are banning food from home is the company that runs the cafeteria wants a monopoly.

Indeed, I must admit that I agree with notyou2 completely here. While I like their excuse (and it may not even be an excuse...the food may very well be healthier), I do unfortunately believe this is the real reason behind it. Call me a cynic, I guess.

[Army of GOD]

Once school food is edible, they can start banning home-brought food.

Granted I went to school a long time ago, but I always liked school food, for the most part.

Too many times in high school I would take a bite of the school lunch and then throw it away. Most of the stuff we had was absolute shiite.

[john9blue]

Once school food is edible, they can start banning home-brought food.

Granted I went to school a long time ago, but I always liked school food, for the most part.

Too many times in high school I would take a bite of the school lunch and then throw it away. Most of the stuff we had was absolute shiite.

discrimination against muslims! ban himmmmmm

[shieldgenerator7]

In Ohio, the school food wasn't all that bad. The worst was the pineapples. The skin was still on it and you couldn't chew it so you had to choke on it to consume it. But the burgers, quesadillas, grilled cheese, fruit cups, etc. was delicious. The tater tots were another of my favorites.
Yes, I think kids should eat healthier. But completely banning homemade food may not be the best option. I think the school staff should highly discourage junk food through use of language, billboards, media, announcements, etc. My high school did something similar for drunk driving: they had a whole assembly about what happens at a druink driving accident scene when the emergency teams arrive. It was interesting to watch... but I wouldn't want to be the person doubled over in the backseat laying in a puddle of blood.
Yeah, I think the school should try to take away the kids' want to eat junk food rather than their privilege. Because banning junk food outright will just make the kids want it all the more.

[Army of GOD]

Once school food is edible, they can start banning home-brought food.

Granted I went to school a long time ago, but I always liked school food, for the most part.

Too many times in high school I would take a bite of the school lunch and then throw it away. Most of the stuff we had was absolute shiite.

discrimination against muslims! ban himmmmmm

Hey, it's not my fault two of their most talked about sects in the US sound suspiciously similar to synonyms for poop...

[Woodruff]

Yeah, I think the school should try to take away the kids' want to eat junk food rather than their privilege. Because banning junk food outright will just make the kids want it all the more.

No question.

[muy_thaiguy]

Once school food is edible, they can start banning home-brought food.

Granted I went to school a long time ago, but I always liked school food, for the most part.

Times have changed. Either that, or you had the exception to the rule.

Me, elementary school, let's just say the chicken nuggest could have been mistaken for rocks, junior high we had 10 minutes to eat more or less, and high school, the only food that tasted decently WAS the junk food.

If a school wants to bring in healthy food, fine. But they need to make it edible.

[thegreekdog]

Wow... I did not expect to get some of these responses. I'm pretty upset about this because I think it's setting a precedent for other schools to do the same thing. What if the lunch I pack for my child is healthy? What if my child has a high metabolism and I give him three twinkies because he needs to eat more calories?

HOW ABOUT IT'S MY EFFING KID AND HE CAN EAT WHATEVER THE EFF HE WANTS BECAUSE THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A FREE COUNTRY.

I don't go apeshit about this kind of stuff much because I can tolerate some of the bullshit. But this is just too much. I would take my kid out of this school quickly.

And yes, notyou2, I'm willing to bet that this is about a contract a company has with the school to provide lunches.

[Symmetry]

Wow... I did not expect to get some of these responses. I'm pretty upset about this because I think it's setting a precedent for other schools to do the same thing. What if the lunch I pack for my child is healthy? What if my child has a high metabolism and I give him three twinkies because he needs to eat more calories?

HOW ABOUT IT'S MY EFFING KID AND HE CAN EAT WHATEVER THE EFF HE WANTS BECAUSE THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A FREE COUNTRY.

I don't go apeshit about this kind of stuff much because I can tolerate some of the bullshit. But this is just too much. I would take my kid out of this school quickly.

And yes, notyou2, I'm willing to bet that this is about a contract a company has with the school to provide lunches.

If your kid has special dietary needs, then the article you posted specifically says that they can bring their own lunch. That seems fair to me.

[thegreekdog]

The world sucks. Seriously.

You know like in 50 years, the government will be parenting our children for us? You know this right? I mean this is where we're going. Half of you have no problem with a school telling kids what they can and cannot eat (or, worse yet, forcing them to spend money on lunch). Ten years ago? Everyone would of* been pissed off about this, the principal would have been removed summarily. Now, "hey this is a good idea!"

I'm really disappointed.

*tgd gets a warning for trolling AoG

[Nola_Lifer]

Well I see a few problems with out society in the U.S. One of the problems is parents and school lack communication with each other. Parent expect schools to raise their children but a lot of your morals and discipline should come from your parents. When this doesn't happen, parents blame schools. Just like grades. Parents are responsible for helping their children do well in school and make sure their work is done right and proper. When this doesn't happen, they blame the teacher. When schools are forced to be involved, like supplying food, and the food doesn't reach the standard then parents get pissed. Another problem is how do you feed a few thousand people and not have it be expensive/lose money on it? It isn't easy to feed all these children. You can't expect schools to have gourmet chefs.

[thegreekdog]

Well I see a few problems with out society in the U.S. One of the problems is parents and school lack communication with each other. Parent expect schools to raise their children but a lot of your morals and discipline should come from your parents. When this doesn't happen, parents blame schools. Just like grades. Parents are responsible for helping their children do well in school and make sure their work is done right and proper. When this doesn't happen, they blame the teacher. When schools are forced to be involved, like supplying food, and the food doesn't reach the standard then parents get pissed. Another problem is how do you feed a few thousand people and not have it be expensive/lose money on it? It isn't easy to feed all these children. You can't expect schools to have gourmet chefs.

(1) Parents blame schools too often.
(2) The school is making kids buy lunch because they want to get more money to the lunch provider. It has nothing to do with health. That's my opinion at least. The school doesn't supply the food, someone else does. The children (i.e. the parents) pay for the food. The school has no financial incentive (apart from maybe #2) to make the children buy or not buy lunch. If the school was providing the food, they would have required students to bring their own lunches to save money.

[Nola_Lifer]

Did you see the Daily Show last week? They had a British gentleman on who goes around to schools and shows how bad the food is for our health. The Superintendent of the L.A. school board didn't want him going into those school yet the kids and parents did. Why would this happen? Maybe because a lack of transparency is good for him. One dollar for food, 2 dollars for me comes to mind.

[BigBallinStalin]

The world sucks. Seriously.

You know like in 50 years, the government will be parenting our children for us? You know this right? I mean this is where we're going. Half of you have no problem with a school telling kids what they can and cannot eat (or, worse yet, forcing them to spend money on lunch). Ten years ago? Everyone would of* been pissed off about this, the principal would have been removed summarily. Now, "hey this is a good idea!"

I'm really disappointed.

*tgd gets a warning for trolling AoG

Just think about it: In 20 years from now, there will be software that performs tax accountancy services better than you and without the need for continued human guidance!

[thegreekdog]

The world sucks. Seriously.

You know like in 50 years, the government will be parenting our children for us? You know this right? I mean this is where we're going. Half of you have no problem with a school telling kids what they can and cannot eat (or, worse yet, forcing them to spend money on lunch). Ten years ago? Everyone would of* been pissed off about this, the principal would have been removed summarily. Now, "hey this is a good idea!"

I'm really disappointed.

*tgd gets a warning for trolling AoG

Just think about it: In 20 years from now, there will be software that performs tax accountancy services better than you and without the need for continued human guidance!

Reported for trolling.

Honestly, I think there enough accountants and lawyers in the world that would prevent this from happening.

[BigBallinStalin]

The world sucks. Seriously.

You know like in 50 years, the government will be parenting our children for us? You know this right? I mean this is where we're going. Half of you have no problem with a school telling kids what they can and cannot eat (or, worse yet, forcing them to spend money on lunch). Ten years ago? Everyone would of* been pissed off about this, the principal would have been removed summarily. Now, "hey this is a good idea!"

I'm really disappointed.

*tgd gets a warning for trolling AoG

Just think about it: In 20 years from now, there will be software that performs tax accountancy services better than you and without the need for continued human guidance!

Reported for trolling.

Honestly, I think there enough accountants and lawyers in the world that would prevent this from happening.

Reported for baiting.

Honestly, if companies can save millions by purchasing software and/or machines that can more efficiently do a human's job, then they will do what it takes to make that happen.

Look at electronic data interchange (EDI) systems, Microsoft Dynamics AX, ISO 9000, and manufacturing plants that are almost 100% automated. Hey, even QuickBooks Pro replaces the need for an accountant (to a certain degree).

It's just a matter of time until we will see computers more advanced than Watson figuring out how to exploit loop holes in the tax system.

[Aradhus]

The world sucks. Seriously.

You know like in 50 years, the government will be parenting our children for us? You know this right? I mean this is where we're going. Half of you have no problem with a school telling kids what they can and cannot eat (or, worse yet, forcing them to spend money on lunch). Ten years ago? Everyone would of* been pissed off about this, the principal would have been removed summarily. Now, "hey this is a good idea!"

I'm really disappointed.

*tgd gets a warning for trolling AoG

Actualy ten years ago the reaction would of* been, 'they're making us eat what they say we should eat, which is bad, but can you believe they cancelled FREAKS AND GEEKS??!'

Control, that is all anyone really wants, isn't it? Well they want it too, and they're bigger than you.

* I dunno, seems like the cool new thing

[john9blue]

The world sucks. Seriously.

You know like in 50 years, the government will be parenting our children for us? You know this right? I mean this is where we're going. Half of you have no problem with a school telling kids what they can and cannot eat (or, worse yet, forcing them to spend money on lunch). Ten years ago? Everyone would of* been pissed off about this, the principal would have been removed summarily. Now, "hey this is a good idea!"

I'm really disappointed.

*tgd gets a warning for trolling AoG

Just think about it: In 20 years from now, there will be software that performs tax accountancy services better than you and without the need for continued human guidance!

and i'm going to help write it! mwahahaha. don't take it personally greek

i wonder how many humans i will render obsolete over the course of my lifetime...

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Well first off, some of you are skimming the article.

Any school that bans homemade lunches also puts more money in the pockets of the district's food provider, Chartwells-Thompson. The federal government pays the district for each free or reduced-price lunch taken, and the caterer receives a set fee from the district per lunch.

You know like in 50 years, the government will be parenting our children for us? You know this right?

Greek, haven't you read Brave New World? It's inevitable. This is old news. In fact, they won't even be our children, they'll be mass produced.

-TG

[jay_a2j]

you should have posted this in the "what does liberalism lead to" thread

I was thinking the same thing. lol

[thegreekdog]

you should have posted this in the "what does liberalism lead to" thread

I was thinking the same thing. lol

Except, again, the reason the school may have done this is to let their contractor make more money. And that's certainly not liberalism.

[jay_a2j]

you should have posted this in the "what does liberalism lead to" thread

I was thinking the same thing. lol

Except, again, the reason the school may have done this is to let their contractor make more money. And that's certainly not liberalism.

But that is not the reason. The woman said while on a field trip she noticed some kids bringing soda and hot chips in their lunches and pursued banning packed lunches. (A liberal infringing on the rights of others)

[thegreekdog]

you should have posted this in the "what does liberalism lead to" thread

I was thinking the same thing. lol

Except, again, the reason the school may have done this is to let their contractor make more money. And that's certainly not liberalism.

But that is not the reason. The woman said while on a field trip she noticed some kids bringing soda and hot chips in their lunches and pursued banning packed lunches. (A liberal infringing on the rights of others)

The reason given is "kids need to eat better lunches." The actual reason is "our contractor wants more loot."

It's like taxes on cigarettes or fast food. The reason given is "they are unhealthy and we want to discourage use." The actual reason is "we need tax revenue and if people give up smoking or stop eating fast food, we're screwed."

[shieldgenerator7]

but in the case of cigars and fast food, instead of banning them completely, the government heavily taxed them, trying to take away citizens' want to eat fast food and cigars, but not their privilege. The school in question is doing it completely the other way around.