FREE MEALS all year!!!

[K C Muffin]

I'll bite on the "luxury car for low income" people rant. Several years ago, I found myself divorced, no money (at all), rentals at $900 plus. Because my car payment on a Volvo was over $500 (which was OK while I was married), I couldn't afford the $900 plus rent and all the utilities and food for two teenage boys (no child support, but that's a whole other rant). I tried to qualify for low-income apartment housing. They were all dumps, as far as I could tell, but I could afford the rent. On the application, an applicant had to state assets, which included my Volvo. I couldn't qualify. But if I sold my Volvo, I wouldn't qualify for a loan to buy another. So I was stuck. Luckily, I found a dealer who was sensitive to my plight and willing to stick his neck out and lease me a new Honda for less than half my Volvo payment. Only too happy to take the Volvo off my hands. Which was good...it was coming up on an oil change and God only knows how much that would have cost! And I found a better-than-average apartment in a nice, clean building in a downtown area that was cheap. Things started looking up.

It's a vicious game being played. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

[Outofdodge]

Originally Posted by Bubba

You should concentrate more on prioritizing your money to necessity items.

There's a whole bunch of middle and upper class Americans up to their necks in debt to finance their "got to have it now" lifestyle that can learn from that statement.

But to the issue at hand, it's a slippery slope when one starts pushing their values on another. And I think it is wrong to assert every person on public assistance is driving around in the latest, greatest SUV. I think it is bigoted and steorotypical, but stereotypes and labels it makes life easier for people. Heck I don't know how they even get it pass the credit report process but I don't sell cars. At the same time there is a trickle around economic impact if the stereotype were to be true.

And assuming "middle class status" and "middle class values", did you ever stop and think about the government assistance we get? Ever file a tax return and take a deduction for mortgage interest? For those lucky enough to have sold a Ford County home you had lived in for 20 years and made a little profit but found out the first 500K of that profit was excluded from taxable income (if married, 250K if single)? When you get right down to it, it's just another government entitlement program that helps the housing industry and protects us against inflation but we justify it in other ways. There's more but I think I've said enough for now.

Another thread and another time maybe we can even debate the relative merits of what constitutes "poor" in the US vs let's say Haiti.

[Highwayman]

Originally Posted by Outofdodge

.....did you ever stop and think about the government assistance we get? Ever file a tax return and take a deduction for mortgage interest? For those lucky enough to have sold a Ford County home you had lived in for 20 years and made a little profit but found out the first 500K of that profit was excluded from taxable income (if married, 250K if single)? When you get right down to it, it's just another government entitlement program......

Keeping some of our own money is a government entitlement program?

I guess if you believe that the government owns everything and just gives us an allowance.

[Detector]

But to the issue at hand, it's a slippery slope when one starts pushing their values on another.

I'll agree to a point but when money meant to feed those in need, by meeting the proper criteria(I.E. can't afford it), is being spent on designer cloths and SUV's then we do have a right to complain. And make no mistake the money we spend on these "free meals" thats not needed is going to pay for those SUV's.

Again my problem is I'm just not buying the 70-75%. Take a look at the parents that drive their kids to school, do they look like poverty? Remember at 70-75% most parents should be bringing their kids to school in a vehicle and cloths fitting a free meal.

I just don't see it.

[Outofdodge]

Originally Posted by Highwayman

Keeping some of our own money is a government entitlement program?

I guess if you believe that the government owns everything and just gives us an allowance.

Thanks for proving my point whether you believe you did or not.

The government doesn't owe us a mortgage deduction nor does it owe us an alllowance. But it's OUR money that we're ENTITLED to. Good thing it keeps it out of *their* hands eh?

[Outofdodge]

Originally Posted by Detector

Again my problem is I'm just not buying the 70-75%. Take a look at the parents that drive their kids to work, do they look like poverty? Remember at 70-75% most parents should be bring their kids to school in a vehicle and cloths fitting a free meal.

I just don't see it.

The one thing I noticed was the program was based on income guidelines and not asset guidelines, 70-75% may or may not be too high and I'm sure there are some who have decent cars (see Muffins' experience) and even *designer clothes* but at the end of the day it does not make it a bad program. I'd rather overfeed some then underfeed some because some got overfed. Maybe it is too generous in some's minds but look around at all the government is called or trying to do to please someone that it ends up pleasing no one. Not one of you has addressed that a 40K income in a family of four would qualify for the program. 40K being about the average income of a family with one employed on the packing plant line and one at a local restraunt. 40K being what many people consider a good income.

I'd worry less about the percentage getting free lunches or even the *welfare class* but more about the economic and social drivers that bring decent jobs and services to a community. That was my frustration during my time in dodge, just trying to get disparate groups to get their cranial rectal extractions performed so postive progress could be made. Al the while Garden City was eating our lunch.

[Detector]

That was my frustration during my time in dodge, just trying to get disparate groups to get their cranial rectal extractions performed so postive progress could be made. Al the while Garden City was eating our lunch.

Hehe, Understood

I'm not saying its a bad program in fact I think its a good program. It just scared the *beep* out of me to see 70-75% of the kids getting free meals all year round. Thats a whole lotta food/$$$

[TexKan]

I have been readin this with great interest. Remember the quote is 70 - 75% students are on free OR reduced prices. Doesn't say which % is free.. Also doesn't specify how many kids are from same family comprising that 70%. Seems most immagrant families have kids every 1 to 2 years. I asked one of my moms today - why do you have kids so close? She felt she wanted to get the child bearing thing "out of the way". Yep - that was her plan - have the kids baata bing baata bang - then do what she wants with her life. Now this concept is much different from folks in the south that feel they must procreate a child for every man they have a relationship with. I have seen moms with 6 kids, 6 dads, and they still aren't done havin relationships OR kids.

My point is that 70 - 75% of DC is NOT poverty - just 70 - 75% of the TOTAL schools enrolment is elegiable for free OR reduced meals. I bet there are lots of folks that are elegable but don't take the program cause thier workin summer jobs, or thier family just doesn't participate. Not every cat will go to a neighbors house to eat and bring thier friends! My family too was eligable when I was a kid but my folks just didn't use the lunch program( there was no summer program). We were raised that you only use assistance if there is no silver lining that can be seen. We did get commodities a few times but we rode the bus to go get them. Yes there were plenty of cadalacs!! Those cars were parked at housing progects - we never lived there either but I swear we were a paycheck away many times.

Any program is gonna be abused and misused. Just the way it is. I am far more concerned over crime, stollen identities, not enough law enforcemnt, no border enforcement, etc than I am over feeding kids, vaccinating kids, making sure kids are safe. Thats just me.

Course I do feel some birth control is in order as well. I think we spend our taxes on far more wasteful stuff than free OR reduced meals during the summer, and I think parents ought to take better care of thier own - rather than relying on a "program". It makes the parent lazier than they already are. It's a responibility thing to me.

This summer food thing has proven to keep kids out of trouble by keeping them healthy, well nourished, and active with school. Decreased the drop out rate, juvinile crime rate, indegent health care rate, etc. It's about involvement and over all health of a child. We got crappy parents and parents that have no idea what responsibilty is. That's not the childs fault. If they are hungry - feed em - better than them takin up detention space for stealin to get food. Besides it's cheaper.

[hoarsewhisperer]

who funds these programs? State? with Fed matched funds? In any event, just like any pot of fund money, those monies are pushed to be used and used in their entirety or the money is reduced the following fiscal year. Federally matched funds are notorious for that kind of thinking.

So why not feed a kid?

[Detector]

USD 443 is continuing its summer food service program, which provides nutritious meals to students age 1-18 for free and for adults at a reduced cost. For adults, breakfast is $1.60 and lunch is $3.10.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong but it looks to me as if ALL students age 1-18 eat free, its the adults that get a reduced price.

I'm not opposed to the program and I understand there will always be some abuse, but we see so much complaining about unnecessary government spending when often its not "the man" doing the spending.

If 70-75% of the students were white, black or yellow then I'd still have a problem with what looks to be obvious abuse. Point is why now do we find it necessary to continue this program all year? Have you been to the school office lately? I was there twice this last year and both times only one person there spoke clear English.

I don't agree with the idea of spending funding just because its there or if we don't it will be reduce. Thats the nature of these programs and in my opinion its important that abuse is controlled as much as possible. This one just screams abuse. If funding for such programs warrants being reduce or increased then so be it.

Lets say some potential teacher was to look at our school statistics or some big business was looking into moving into dodge or just a family looking to relocate and saw a 70-75% poverty level it would give an unrealistic view of a poverty stricken city. Am I the only one that cares about Dodge City's reputation? We complain about Dodge City being headed down the shit'r but set back and allow it to happen.

What happens on down the road when the government shuts down the gravy train because of abuse? Then the kids that really need this program have those who turn a blind eye to thank for going hungry. And you know who'll complain the most. The same ones that allowed it to be abused in the first place.

If the program is being abuse, which in my opinion the numbers clearly shout, then its destine to fail. Maybe not today or even next year but it will fail. The biggest problem we have in dodge seems to be people that only care to look short term to make people happy.

So again are we really doing these kids a favor? I'm sure it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy to say "but no kid goes hungry" but do you really think if we didn't feed them they'd go hungry? NO! it would simply put the responsibility back on the parents, where it should be, to provide for their kids. Now look again at the parents dropping those kids off at school. Do they look like they could feed their own kids? I think not. This program is just a connivance for these parents and is also creating another generation of "wheres my handout" citizens.

As far as the $40,000 a year you're not taking into account our cost of living. Granted today its not very pretty, but its not as bad as it could be. 40k a year is a bit conservative for a household with 2 working parents. Often if one parent works at the plant both do. In any case 40k can allow for a decent living in dodge. Besides, with our large number of undocumented residents how could you ever get an accurate number? I often see a household with 3-4 people all working at the plant. I'd bet any kids in this household are also eligible for these free meals.

Heck, I raised 4 kids making far less than 40k and I never qualified for any special treatment. And it wasn't all that long ago.