English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

and they need the school to provide a free lunch.

2006-07-25 05:15:31 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance Personal Finance

How much is a loaf of bread and a pound of ham $4.00 and thats a week of lunches.

2006-07-25 05:16:38 · update #1

19 answers

When we had our first child we were on State assistance for the cost of medical care. Not food stamps or WIC just the labor and delivery. The doctor had the balls to tell us we should stop having children if we couldnt pay for them or insurance. I made 25k a year at the time! Thats still considered just over poverty! Hahahaha

2006-07-25 05:38:25 · answer #1 · answered by Gregg H 3 · 3 2

As the recipient of the free lunch program for many years let me try to explain.

It was just my mother & me. She worked, but barely made enough to pay the rent, utilities, etc. My father is what is known today as a "deadbeat dad", but better than the abusive bastard that he was to live with. There was very little money left over for food, clothes, shoes, healthcare, etc.

The meals that I ate at school were often the only chance that I got for a BALANCED meal. Sometimes they were the only meal that included meat or a vegetable. There were many meals at my house that were only rice or noodles.

People do not start off deciding to have children that they can not afford. They do the best they can with what they have.

Unless you have been there, you will have a hard time understanding. When I was there, kids made fun of me for getting free lunch. I didn't care, I was hungry.

2006-07-25 07:10:17 · answer #2 · answered by Sharingan 6 · 0 0

idk...i guess there COULD be some people like that SOMEwhere...like if a family's breadwinner became a victim of a life-threatening illness or something that rendered them unable to work for a prolonged period of time they would need to save every penny and i guess lunch would be a luxury for them. or, in some households, the parents spend so much time at work it's not that they can't AFFORD to feed their kids, they just dont have TIME to make the actual lunches every day. obviously, these are the types of families the free-lunch program was made for. but sadly, there are very FEW of these people out there today.
i see people on welfare dressed up in brand-new (and i mean BRAND-NEW, NOT secondhand) nikes or adidases, and its disgusting. i mean, if you can afford a $50.00 pair of shoes, you can obviously afford those $4.00 to feed your kids, and you obviously don't need welfare!! but NOOO, these people are either too lazy or too damn cheap to make lunches for their own kids. the school, not wanting to look like it *discriminates* against certain families, gives every kid who doesn't bring a lunch to school a lunch. which i guess is fair, cause it isnt the KID'S fault they were born to such lazy no-good parents...but it IS a waste of money when the kid's parents could easily have provided the same thing.
i think the best step is a FULL overhaul of the welfare AND free lunch system program. if people *need* freebies, the government should monitor their expenses, bank accounts, income for a year or so to see if they actually DO need these things, instead of just listening to the sob stories of people with too many kids. then, they should only get welfare on the condition that they get a job/work towards getting one by getting interviewed, educated, etc. in "x" amount of time, or face TOTAL CUT-OFF (obviously this doesnt apply to the disabled/retired, but to the able-bodied young and LAZY). that way, you could get more and better aid to the people that ACTUALLY needed it.

sorry for the long rant, but those are just my thoughts =)

2006-07-25 05:37:14 · answer #3 · answered by veevee 2 · 0 0

there are working people who make less than 200 dollars a week.
Take off 1/3 for taxes, etc. (800 a month, roughly)

It has been decades since i have seen an apartment for less than 600 a month.

There are people who have no job at all.

NO MONEY at all means NO LUNCH MONEY.



It is tragic that the school needs to privide a free lunch, but i can certainly understand that a hungry child is not going to be focused on learning.

2006-07-25 05:22:11 · answer #4 · answered by nickipettis 7 · 0 0

How can someone like you be so ignorant as to write a question like that?!!! You must have never suffered in your life! For YOUR information: Ham and Bread are NOT a nutritionally well rounded meal! #2 The schools need people who are underprivledged to apply for school lunches for the school to also recieve their GRANT MONEY from the government to provide OTHER school programs!!!!!!!!!!! GROW UP ! DO YOU HAVE KIDS? A CAR PAYMENT? DO YOU EVEN PAY RENT????????

2006-07-25 05:21:50 · answer #5 · answered by LoveMyLife 4 · 0 0

Trust me, it can happen to the nicest people. My disabled partner's husband was sent to jail for abusing their daughter. With him went the family income. Then the house was burnt when the kids got careless. Since I joined the family I have been paying the bills etc. out of my own savings but we can't go on like that indefinitely.

Yes, Xaviers. In the US food stamps are available. And if you qualify for food stamps your child is probably eligible for free school meals which are considered part of the food stamps cost to the taxpayer.

2006-07-25 05:25:33 · answer #6 · answered by kittybriton 5 · 0 0

You'll love this one. About 30 years ago while visiting a nephew in the pediatric ward of a hospital, 2 young women came in with an infant and turned the baby over to the 2 nurses on duty...said they couldn't afford to feed the baby (breast milk anyone????) Turned and walked away and left the baby. We were all stunned and the nurses were furious. BOTH WOMEN WERE SMOKING!! Each had a lit cigarette, this in the day when it was okay to smoke in hospitals and everywhere else. Yes, you can afford cigarettes but nothing for your baby....People are just selfish and lazy....still gets me mad to think about it.

2006-07-25 05:24:53 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

most poor are rather lazy and can be considered a drain on socitey. They would rather buy$150 basketball jerseys rather than a book for their child. Plus, many of those ppl buy drugs and just like to play the system, especially the public schools.

2006-07-25 05:45:07 · answer #8 · answered by Chris W 3 · 0 0

One of my friend is from Nepal(Mt everest) who says in her country most of the people produce more children as more no of children means more labour in the field , also people are quiet ignorent about contraceptive and due to poverty sex seems to be a source of entertainment.Well thats a part of world for you.

2006-07-25 05:35:32 · answer #9 · answered by esses 1 · 0 0

this is the part of life money is like magnet one magnet attract another magnet if u have 1 Rs u can earn another 1 Rs if u don't have money it is very difficult to earn other wise in other case if u are very careless u are ignoring your responsiblity ,but this is a part of life some people having millons of millions n some are not having single money.

2006-07-25 05:22:53 · answer #10 · answered by vj s 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers