NY Schools Warned Free Lunches May Lead To Obesity

[Shadow]

A top New York City Department of Health official has criticized a free breakfast program in city schools, saying it makes poor kids fat.
Director of Community Epidemiology Gretchen Van Wye said in-class meals result in a whopping 21.2 percent of kids gobbling up two breakfasts.
"Special care should be taken to ensure that children are not inadvertently taking in excess calories by eating in multiple locations," she wrote in a research paper recently presented to her agency co-workers, sources told the New York Post.
She said "further evaluations" are needed to weigh caloric consumption in schools with the program versus schools without.



Some of Van Wye's colleagues are losing their lunch over the controversial study, fearing that the Yale-educated scientist's findings could lay the groundwork for scrapping part or all of city's free breakfast program.
"We'd rather have kids be hungry than fat? Horrible!" a stunned health official told the New Post. "The evidence is so shaky. And the implications are terrible—kids going hungry."
Van Wye's paper examines the impact of in-class breakfasts, a voluntary program that was introduced in 2008.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/01/09/ny-schools-warned-free-breakfasts-may-lead-to-obesity/

[ConHog]

WOW all the guy did was suggest that care should be taken to make sure kids aren't eating multiple breakfasts. It's not like he suggested taking away anyone's tray and telling them they had enough to eat.

Our school nurse has voiced the same concerns to us. In our case we have decided that the risk of kids over eating is outweighed (no pun intended) by the benefits of feeding those who are hungry.

[Shadow]

Study shows that 1 in 5 of these children would not go hungry and infact are greedy little bastards ( oh wait or is it...fat children who over eat are stupid fat fucks) who are now being given and eating breakfast twice because it is FREE. Makes you wonder if this program is even needed. So...now they are going to do what?? Now that these kid are "obese" are they going to force these little brats parents (that they made fat with their own program) to get them on a "maditory" diet program...or threaten to send them to foster care?

[ConHog]

Study shows that 1 in 5 of these children would not go hungry and infact are greedy little bastards ( oh wait or is it...fat children who over eat are stupid fat fucks) who are now being given and eating breakfast twice because it is FREE. Makes you wonder if this program is even needed. So...now they are going to do what?? Now that these kid are "obese"? Force these little brats parents (that they made fat with their own program) to get them on a "maditory" diet program...or threaten to send them to foster care?

HUH?

I don't get it anyway. There are supposed to be safeguards in place to make sure money isn't wasted by feeding kids who don't need the meal (I'm talking about free meals here of course) if a parent is paying for it, then I don't think the school should be saying anything one way or the other unless the kid is just OBESE and maybe no even then unless it's really bad.

[Shadow]

HUH?

I don't get it anyway. There are supposed to be safeguards in place to make sure money isn't wasted by feeding kids who don't need the meal (I'm talking about free meals here of course) if a parent is paying for it, then I don't think the school should be saying anything one way or the other unless the kid is just OBESE and maybe no even then unless it's really bad.

If these kids are eating two breakfasts every day...what does that tell you about this program? And the school officials are worried that because of these findings this program may be "scrapped"? It should be scrapped...it's a waste of tax payers money.

[ConHog]

If these kids are eating two breakfasts every day...what does that tell you about this program? And the school officials are worried that because of these findings this program may be "scrapped"? It should be scrapped...it's a waste of tax payers money.

Of all the wastes in government spending I feel the same way about this as I do about welfare. I can live with a little abuse if a few who actually need the help are getting it.

Our school has SEVERAL kids who are coming to school without any breakfast at all, and although it's obviously not an obligation to feed them, I have no problem doing so.

[Shadow]

How do you know it's only a "little" abuse? What makes you think that the other kids in the survey would go hungry if they didn't get a free breakfast every morning? Maybe their parents would feed them (or they would fix their own breakfast) if they didn't already know they would be fed for "free" once they got to school? Bet you every one of those kids gets a free lunch too.

[Nukeman]

Here's my take on this. Most kids who qualify for "free" lunches and breakfast also qualify for food stamps. In my opinion that is "double dipping" I went round with someone on this topic before. The whole point of food stamps is to FEED the people that are on it, why can't they fix a lunch for junior or give them breakfast BEFORE they go to school after all we are already paying for the food for them, why the double dip???

[ConHog]

Here's my take on this. Most kids who qualify for "free" lunches and breakfast also qualify for food stamps. In my opinion that is "double dipping" I went round with someone on this topic before. The whole point of food stamps is to FEED the people that are on it, why can't they fix a lunch for junior or give them breakfast BEFORE they go to school after all we are already paying for the food for them, why the double dip???

Because people are stupid.

Children shouldn't be punished with no lunch because their parents are stupid.

Now, if you're advocating cracking down on these stupid parents. I'm in. But feed their kids while we do so.

[Abbey Marie]

Here's my take on this. Most kids who qualify for "free" lunches and breakfast also qualify for food stamps. In my opinion that is "double dipping" I went round with someone on this topic before. The whole point of food stamps is to FEED the people that are on it, why can't they fix a lunch for junior or give them breakfast BEFORE they go to school after all we are already paying for the food for them, why the double dip???

You see, Nuke, free food doesn't mean "already prepared food", or even better, "cooked food". For a few years at least, the kids still needs a responsible parent who will actually get up and take care of this for them. The nanny state would never expect parents to be this responsible.:rolleyes:

[Nukeman]

Because people are stupid.

Children shouldn't be punished with no lunch because their parents are stupid.

Now, if you're advocating cracking down on these stupid parents. I'm in. But feed their kids while we do so.Once again the argument "its for the children". When does that become enough. I feel for them I truely do, my parents worked 2 jobs while I was growing up to put food on our table they payed for school lunches for 3 of us and NEVER took a dime in money fromt he govt. As long as YOU and others are willing to fall back on the argument of "its for the children" it will NEVER stop. you have to take a stand and unfortunately soome will suffer for a while until it resolves but if the parents are jsut dead beats than take the kids from them and place them where they can be cared for.. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY... we all need to have it or get it....


You see, Nuke, free food doesn't mean "already prepared food", or even better, "cooked food". For a few years at least, the kids still needs a responsible parent who will actually get up and take care of this for them. The nanny state would never expect parents to be this responsible.:rolleyes:I grew up with cold cereal for breakfast, I made it myself from the age of 7-8 on becasue my parents were already at work. All most parents have to do is have "something" there for them to eat and kids will eat it.... You know that stuff the food stamps went for...

[ConHog]

Once again the argument "its for the children". When does that become enough. I feel for them I truely do, my parents worked 2 jobs while I was growing up to put food on our table they payed for school lunches for 3 of us and NEVER took a dime in money fromt he govt. As long as YOU and others are willing to fall back on the argument of "its for the children" it will NEVER stop. you have to take a stand and unfortunately soome will suffer for a while until it resolves but if the parents are jsut dead beats than take the kids from them and place them where they can be cared for.. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY... we all need to have it or get it....

Here's the way I , and most school boards, look at. Studies show that students that are hungry learn far less than students who are not. So HOPEFULLY be making sure these kids aren't hungry they will then focus more on their school work and have a better chance at becoming productive citizens. Of course that won't always work out, but we have to try.

[Nukeman]

Here's the way I , and most school boards, look at. Studies show that students that are hungry learn far less than students who are not. So HOPEFULLY be making sure these kids aren't hungry they will then focus more on their school work and have a better chance at becoming productive citizens. Of course that won't always work out, but we have to try.Once again its the same story.. "its for the children".. I understand the issue here but WHEN is enough enough??? They are already getting money for food and if they are not using themoney for food than they need to be cut the amount it cost to feed the students at school. See if the parents scream than when it cuts into cig and beer money.. it comes down to parental responsibility and as long as someone else is willing to take care of little junior there they will NOT do it...

So when is it enough of "its for the children"?? We cant parent for EVERYONE!! Plus it isn't the states responsibilty to parent for these kids!!

[ConHog]

Once again its the same story.. "its for the children".. I understand the issue here but WHEN is enough enough??? They are already getting money for food and if they are not using themoney for food than they need to be cut the amount it cost to feed the students at school. See if the parents scream than when it cuts into cig and beer money.. it comes down to parental responsibility and as long as someone else is willing to take care of little junior there they will NOT do it...

So when is it enough of "its for the children"?? We cant parent for EVERYONE!! Plus it isn't the states responsibilty to parent for these kids!!

I see your point man. I really do, and that's cool. Let's do away with food stamps and feed kids 3 squares a day at school. Adults you're on your own. telling a kid , you're a parent is a piece of crap so sorry, no breakfast for you is no solution. AND when we have verifiable proof that kids who aren't hungry at school do better in school , isn't that something we should encourage?

[Abbey Marie]

Once again its the same story.. "its for the children".. I understand the issue here but WHEN is enough enough??? They are already getting money for food and if they are not using themoney for food than they need to be cut the amount it cost to feed the students at school. See if the parents scream than when it cuts into cig and beer money.. it comes down to parental responsibility and as long as someone else is willing to take care of little junior there they will NOT do it...

So when is it enough of "its for the children"?? We cant parent for EVERYONE!! Plus it isn't the states responsibilty to parent for these kids!!

Nuke, you sound like my husband, and from me, that is a compliment. He has been saying to me for a while that the fastest way to make someone scared to disagree with you, no matter how crazy your ideas, is to say "It's for the children."

[Abbey Marie]

I see your point man. I really do, and that's cool. Let's do away with food stamps and feed kids 3 squares a day at school. Adults you're on your own. telling a kid , you're a parent is a piece of crap so sorry, no breakfast for you is no solution. AND when we have verifiable proof that kids who aren't hungry at school do better in school , isn't that something we should encourage?


Where does it end, this quest to make up for crappy parents? Should we just take all the kids away and be done with it? Lord knows what else is going on at home that makes it harder for kids to learn.

[DragonStryk72]

You know what? This just has to be said: It's not the food. Dear jesus, we've been eating food for the entire span of our history. If you really want to lower obesity in kids, then unplug the XBOX/PS3/Wii, and kick your kid out of the house. Seriously, you almost never see kids playing outside anymore, and I get it, I'm a gamer, there are many fun video games out there. However, there comes a point where parents are just aiding and abetting the whole thing.

Everyone keeps trying to blame food, but honestly, we just aren't as active as a society as we used to be. We're still taking in the calories, but we just don't do the activities we used to do.

[ConHog]

You know what? This just has to be said: It's not the food. Dear jesus, we've been eating food for the entire span of our history. If you really want to lower obesity in kids, then unplug the XBOX/PS3/Wii, and kick your kid out of the house. Seriously, you almost never see kids playing outside anymore, and I get it, I'm a gamer, there are many fun video games out there. However, there comes a point where parents are just aiding and abetting the whole thing.

Everyone keeps trying to blame food, but honestly, we just aren't as active as a society as we used to be. We're still taking in the calories, but we just don't do the activities we used to do.

Absolutely true. I'm a huge gamer myself. But that can't be ALL you do.

[logroller]

Here's my take on this. Most kids who qualify for "free" lunches and breakfast also qualify for food stamps. In my opinion that is "double dipping" I went round with someone on this topic before. The whole point of food stamps is to FEED the people that are on it, why can't they fix a lunch for junior or give them breakfast BEFORE they go to school after all we are already paying for the food for them, why the double dip???


Absolutely true. I'm a huge gamer myself. But that can't be ALL you do.

Quite right, gotta post in chat forums too.:lol9:

[SassyLady]

perhaps the obese kids should have an extra PE class.

[CSM]

You know what? This just has to be said: It's not the food. Dear jesus, we've been eating food for the entire span of our history. If you really want to lower obesity in kids, then unplug the XBOX/PS3/Wii, and kick your kid out of the house. Seriously, you almost never see kids playing outside anymore, and I get it, I'm a gamer, there are many fun video games out there. However, there comes a point where parents are just aiding and abetting the whole thing.

Everyone keeps trying to blame food, but honestly, we just aren't as active as a society as we used to be. We're still taking in the calories, but we just don't do the activities we used to do.

I too am a gamer and totally agree. Part of the problem (IMO) is that the internet (and gaming devices) allows annonyimity ... no danger of face-to-face social interaction. This means kids (who are just naturally insecure to begin with, for the most part) do not have to deal with it. It's one thing to interact over the internet where people don't actually "know" you and another where you have to personally interact with other people who can actually see the real you. Also, it is far to easy to sit in the comfort of your own home and work out your twitch skills and claim uber-l33tness than to actually go out and do alll that running, climbing, driving and even shooting for real. I can run for miles on xbox ... in real life, not so much. Bottom line is that kids these days have a whole different paradigm where achievement and success are concerned than I did when I was growing up. No child is allowed to be too intelligent, too strong, too proficient lest others feel inadequate. Our society and culture has done this, not food.

Get those dang kids outside and moving instead of allowing them to sit on their fat fannies pretending to be something in a fantasy world that has NO relation to real life!

[DragonStryk72]

I too am a gamer and totally agree. Part of the problem (IMO) is that the internet (and gaming devices) allows annonyimity ... no danger of face-to-face social interaction. This means kids (who are just naturally insecure to begin with, for the most part) do not have to deal with it. It's one thing to interact over the internet where people don't actually "know" you and another where you have to personally interact with other people who can actually see the real you. Also, it is far to easy to sit in the comfort of your own home and work out your twitch skills and claim uber-l33tness than to actually go out and do alll that running, climbing, driving and even shooting for real. I can run for miles on xbox ... in real life, not so much. Bottom line is that kids these days have a whole different paradigm where achievement and success are concerned than I did when I was growing up. No child is allowed to be too intelligent, too strong, too proficient lest others feel inadequate. Our society and culture has done this, not food.

Get those dang kids outside and moving instead of allowing them to sit on their fat fannies pretending to be something in a fantasy world that has NO relation to real life!

This is always my central problem. If you're going to punish excellence, then what do you expect but mediocrity?

[ConHog]

Quite right, gotta post in chat forums too.:lol9:

lol AND run 5 miles every morning. Don't forget that.

[CSM]

This is always my central problem. If you're going to punish excellence, then what do you expect but mediocrity?

Our society prefers perfect mediocrity as opposed to flawed exceptionalism. We are raising our children that way.

[DragonStryk72]

Our society prefers perfect mediocrity as opposed to flawed exceptionalism. We are raising our children that way.

Yet everyone's shocked when we end up falling back in education and health as opposed to other countries

[CSM]

Yet everyone's shocked when we end up falling back in education and health as opposed to other countries

The only ones shocked are the ones who believe that excelling at anything is somehow detrimental to others. The exception for those people are themselves of course.

[DragonStryk72]

The only ones shocked are the ones who believe that excelling at anything is somehow detrimental to others. The exception for those people are themselves of course.

And you really only need to look at the main Asian countries to put the lie to those thoughts. They push their kids to excel, and guess what? they excel. It's almost like having standards might push kids to meet or exceed those standards.

[CSM]

And you really only need to look at the main Asian countries to put the lie to those thoughts. They push their kids to excel, and guess what? they excel. It's almost like having standards might push kids to meet or exceed those standards.

yA THINK???

The idea that every kid gets a trophy, every kid gets a blue ribbon and every kid gets an A is just plain bogus. It certainly is a reflection of our society though. Why work for ANYTHING? We should all get the same; everyone gets money, everyone gets a house, everyone gets an education, etc. etc. regardless of the amount of effort any individual expends or does not expend to get those things. The result is as we see today, lack of individual responsibility, no integrity, no self discipline but hey we are approaching perfect mediocrity so it's all good .... right?

[Abbey Marie]

The only ones shocked are the ones who believe that excelling at anything is somehow detrimental to others. The exception for those people are themselves of course.

Wouldn't want to injure the little egos now. :rolleyes:

[ConHog]

yA THINK???

The idea that every kid gets a trophy, every kid gets a blue ribbon and every kid gets an A is just plain bogus. It certainly is a reflection of our society though. Why work for ANYTHING? We should all get the same; everyone gets money, everyone gets a house, everyone gets an education, etc. etc. regardless of the amount of effort any individual expends or does not expend to get those things. The result is as we see today, lack of individual responsibility, no integrity, no self discipline but hey we are approaching perfect mediocrity so it's all good .... right?

I don't mind the trophies for everyone at a young age; but 8-10 years old somewhere in that age group, it's time to start teaching kids that winners get to fuck the home coming queen and losers well are losers. :laugh:

[gabosaurus]

A top New York City Department of Health official has criticized a free breakfast program in city schools, saying it makes poor kids fat.
Director of Community Epidemiology Gretchen Van Wye said in-class meals result in a whopping 21.2 percent of kids gobbling up two breakfasts.



What absolute total bullshit!! Who does these bunghole surveys and where are there figures?
You want to know why many kids go hungry? Go to their homes (if they actually have homes. many are homeless). Some don't have refrigerators. Or even electricity.
Perhaps Shadows lives in one of those gated neighborhoods where everyone has whatever they want. Perhaps he/she/it has never been to an actual barrio, where kids grow up without anything.
I would suggest that, unless you know all the fact, you stop acting like such a condescending bitch.

[ConHog]

What absolute total bullshit!! Who does these bunghole surveys and where are there figures?
You want to know why many kids go hungry? Go to their homes (if they actually have homes. many are homeless). Some don't have refrigerators. Or even electricity.
Perhaps Shadows lives in one of those gated neighborhoods where everyone has whatever they want. Perhaps he/she/it has never been to an actual barrio, where kids grow up without anything.
I would suggest that, unless you know all the fact, you stop acting like such a condescending bitch.

whaaa?

Look, I don't mind giving help to those who are actually taking advantage of the help But you DO realize that it actually isn't the place of government to do so, right?

[gabosaurus]

whaaa?

Look, I don't mind giving help to those who are actually taking advantage of the help But you DO realize that it actually isn't the place of government to do so, right?

Whose place is it?

[ConHog]

Whose place is it?

Private charities, churches, family, how did people who were less fortunate survive before government welfare? A pretty solid argument could be made that the problem of poverty in this country has been made WORSE by government assistance in fact.

In EITHER case isn't labeling someone a bitch simply because they disagree with you a little much? It's not like Shadow is advocating letting kids starve.

[fj1200]

Whose place is it?

Just wondering... is there any point in attempting a discussion here?

[ConHog]

Just wondering... is there any point in attempting a discussion here?

Get off your high horse bitch.


:flameth::laugh2:

[Shadow]

What absolute total bullshit!! Who does these bunghole surveys and where are there figures?
You want to know why many kids go hungry? Go to their homes (if they actually have homes. many are homeless). Some don't have refrigerators. Or even electricity.
Perhaps Shadows lives in one of those gated neighborhoods where everyone has whatever they want. Perhaps he/she/it has never been to an actual barrio, where kids grow up without anything.
I would suggest that, unless you know all the fact, you stop acting like such a condescending bitch.

Very doubtful that eating one breakfast instead of two is gonna kill all the kiddies.
:rolleyes:

I love libs.

Making little Johnny cut back on the multiple breakfast consumption that is making him fat = bad

Shoving scissors in babies necks severing their spinal chords = A-OK .:thumb:


Private charities, churches, family, how did people who were less fortunate survive before government welfare? A pretty solid argument could be made that the problem of poverty in this country has been made WORSE by government assistance in fact.

In EITHER case isn't labeling someone a bitch simply because they disagree with you a little much? It's not like Shadow is advocating letting kids starve.

One of which is the United Way...several programs available through that organization, including backpacks of food for kids to take home on the weekends.

[gabosaurus]

I think shadow is advocating that we allow kids to starve.
How can any person make a judgement without know more facts about the case?
Should we force children to suffer if their parents are unable or unwilling or feed them? Is it a kid's fault if he or she goes to school hungry?
Certainly are a lot of folks here riding high horses.

[fj1200]

^ I have an idea; let's institute a program where parents are expected to provide for their children and given the tools to do so.

[gabosaurus]

^ I have an idea; let's institute a program where parents are expected to provide for their children and given the tools to do so.

Every parent is expected to provide for their children. Some refuse to do so. Is this the kid's fault?

[ConHog]

I think shadow is advocating that we allow kids to starve.
How can any person make a judgement without know more facts about the case?
Should we force children to suffer if their parents are unable or unwilling or feed them? Is it a kid's fault if he or she goes to school hungry?
Certainly are a lot of folks here riding high horses.

Irrespective of what parents are or are not doing , you DO actually realize that feeding people is not the government's mandate right?

I am FOR providing free breakfast and lunch to needy children, and I have defended the idea that providing meals to hungry kids will make them better students so that hopefully they will have better tools than their own parents did; but someone disagreeing with that opinion is neither on a high horse, nor a bitch. AND there is absolutely positively no right to a government handout if you're a hungry kid. Sorry, but that is the way it is.


Every parent is expected to provide for their children. Some refuse to do so. Is this the kid's fault?

Of course not, but neither is it society's fault. We have chosen to make it our problem, some don't agree with us choosing to do so, and certainly there is NO right to such expectations.

[fj1200]

Every parent is expected to provide for their children. Some refuse to do so. Is this the kid's fault?

Clearly not when they are enabled to the extent that they do not have to.

[DragonStryk72]

I don't mind the trophies for everyone at a young age; but 8-10 years old somewhere in that age group, it's time to start teaching kids that winners get to fuck the home coming queen and losers well are losers. :laugh:


Actually, the longer you hold off failure, the harder it is for kids to adjust to it. My brother's an example of this. He's one of those annoying little bastards who're pretty much good at everything he tries to do, so for years he had never really failed at anything, until high school when he fell behind at his private school and couldn't pull it out. Seriously, he had a really rough time coming out of it, and we were a bit worried about it. Up til then, whether it was bike riding, guitar, teaching himself keyboard, computer programming, an over the internet web design business, it all worked for him at an insane rate, and he suddenly ran headlong into a brick wall.

[ConHog]

^ I have an idea; let's institute a program where parents are expected to provide for their children and given the tools to do so.

FJ you just hit exactly why I favor the program. I believe that kids who go hungry (and studies back this up) are LESS likely to do well in school and thus likely to remain in whatever financial situation they are currently in. Conversely if feeding a poor child today helps them do better in school and consequently they are able to better provide for their own families later in life, haven't we in fact provided them with that tool?

Of course I say this totally recognizing that many people are just pieces of shit who will abuse any and all programs and not actually be helped by anything we do. But if we help 1 reach the goal it's worth it to me.

[Abbey Marie]

And as with most social programs, word gets out that all you have to do is apply, and be below a certain income level, and you get free breakfasts. Then, those who could sacrifice in other areas to feed their children, stop doing so and climb on the gravy train. Oh, I just love those (shoes/cigarettes/gold earrings/smart phones/alcohol etc.)
And it never ends. In our local pre-K FREE program, in addition to free food, someone will even take your child for a dental appointment for you. Guess who is paying for that little slice o' handout?

I doubt anyone would deny a child food if they thought the system was only being used by those who really have no other choice but to go hungry.

[DragonStryk72]

I think shadow is advocating that we allow kids to starve.
How can any person make a judgement without know more facts about the case?
Should we force children to suffer if their parents are unable or unwilling or feed them? Is it a kid's fault if he or she goes to school hungry?
Certainly are a lot of folks here riding high horses.

No, he isn't.
How can any person make a judgement without knowing more facts about how a person actually feels?
No, we should take those kids out of those homes, period. We have a backlog of people willing to adopt.
You chief among them.

[fj1200]

FJ you just hit exactly why I favor the program. I believe that kids who go hungry (and studies back this up) are LESS likely to do well in school and thus likely to remain in whatever financial situation they are currently in. Conversely if feeding a poor child today helps them do better in school and consequently they are able to better provide for their own families later in life, haven't we in fact provided them with that tool?

Of course I say this totally recognizing that many people are just pieces of shit who will abuse any and all programs and not actually be helped by anything we do. But if we help 1 reach the goal it's worth it to me.

No, I believe that studies show that kids achievement is predominantly based on their parents education level. Feeding them breakfast and lunch just makes us all feel better without addressing the root causes.

[ConHog]

And as with most social programs, word gets out that all you have to do is apply, and be below a certain income level, and you get free breakfasts. Then, those who could sacrifice in other areas to feed their children, stop doing so and climb on the gravy train. Oh, I just love those (shoes/cigarettes/gold earrings/smart phones/alcohol etc.)
And it never ends. In our local pre-K FREE program, in addition to free food, someone will even take your child for a dental appointment for you. Guess who is paying for that little slice o' handout?

I doubt anyone would deny a child food if they thought the system was only being used by those who really have no other choice but to go hungry.

There ARE watchdogs who will remove abusers from the system, just not many of them in comparison to how many people use the program. We've had a few people removed from the program over the years.

We've also fed quite a few kids who obviously were hungry.

Personally, I think the programs should stay and there should be jail time for abusers of ANY welfare program.

[Abbey Marie]

Add "parents who value education and pass on those values" to fj1200's post, and :clap:

[Abbey Marie]

There ARE watchdogs who will remove abusers from the system, just not many of them in comparison to how many people use the program. We've had a few people removed from the program over the years.

We've also fed quite a few kids who obviously were hungry.

Personally, I think the programs should stay and there should be jail time for abusers of ANY welfare program.

There is no way to feasibly monitor how people are actually spending their cash. and more importantly, it all turns on what is defined as abuse in the first place. My contention is that what the people in charge define as abuse, and what I define, are probably poles apart.

[ConHog]

Add "parents who value education and pass on those values" to fj1200's post, and :clap:

I've seen to many kids do better than you would think they would given their parents with the right encouragement to just write off kids who have bad parents. Sure it influences them, but it isn't a limiting factor.

Think of it as an investment. We feed them and encourage them to do well in school so that when they are on their own, they themselves don't think being on welfare is acceptable. That's how I look at it. That's not to say I'm okay with parents who are using something that is available simply because they can.

[ConHog]

There is no way to feasibly monitor how people are actually spending their cash. and more importantly, it all turns on what is defined as abuse in the first place. My contention is that what the people in charge define as abuse, and what I define, are probably poles apart.

no of course there isn't , but there are things we CAN do. For example. I am for only giving welfare to the employed. If you've been unemployed for 6 months or more out of a calender year, I don't think you should get any assistance. How much would that save the system? This of course doesn't apply to people who are disabled and can't work. They have their own rules and programs, and that's another thread, I just don't want Gabby in here babbling that I want disabled people to starve.

Oh and also before she babbles that some people can't find jobs I say bullshit. Anyone who goes a year without a job has chosen to go a year without a job. May not be the best job or the best paying job out there, but so what. Go clean toilets THEN we'll assist you.