Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010... OH MY!

Amerika

Michelle Obama in her commitment to raise a healthier generation of kids, helped to push through the “Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010,” which was signed into law by her husband Barack Obama.

Well it just took effect with the start of this school year and has now seemingly lead to an entire generation of young anarchists. It was funny in a way. My kids were complaining about it the very first day. I said you can thank Michelle and Barack Obama for it. “NO WAY!” was their reply. “YEAH WAY!” was my response and I showed them the letter sent home from the school district noting what they were required to do because of the efforts of Michelle and Barack. Now my kids (and just about all other kids in the nation it seems) are in an uproar. The food is disgusting, wilted, rotten, tasteless and inedible, and they’re now refusing to eat most of it. “Vote Obama Out” and “Anyone But Obama” suddenly seems to be the battle cry of the school age young. They are all starting to talk like Republicans rather than Democrats-in-training. “Why is the government telling us what we have to eat.” “I can decide for myself what to eat, stay out of my decisions.” Etc, etc…I LOVE IT (well their attitude, not the government making those decisions because they believe I can’t decide what’s best for my kids).

As a parent you can screw with most everything, just don’t screw with our kids. I’ve talked to a number of parents about this, and it seems many now utilize the name “Obama” much the same as when Seinfeld said “Neuman!” in disgust.

Bad timing for an election. Surprised the media hasn’t mentioned this nationwide outcry. It’s so bad the kids would rather eat NOTHING than a school lunch. Question: How many kids have become fat eating school lunches? LOL

Wouldn’t it be a kick in the pants if Obama was ultimately defeated this election because of school kids?

20Cent

Pizza is a vegetable give them that.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

Pizza is a vegetable give them that.

Funny, I said the same thing. But pizza is ala carte, and the line is so long for pizza that over half the kids don't get served wanting pizza before the lunch period is over.

Corkfeen

How awful, expecting children to eat nutritious food rather than ****e. I'm fairly certain that most primary schools in Ireland have something along the line of this in place. The fact of the matter is that obesity is a major issue so why not get them to start eating healthy from young age so that it becomes a habit.

If this effected the outcome of the elections in a negative way which it won't. It really would be a bad reflection of the priorities of the voter.... Is it really an issue to make sure that children are eating healthily? It helps to avoid both malnutrition and obesity.


Wait, they're not genuinely categorising pizza as a vegetable, right? :P

Amerika

I even told my kids that I would give them packs of hot dog buns so they can sell at school on the black market for those who want to replace their horrid wheat buns for something tasty... and will help pay for their college education. They said the school already thought of this, and any kid selling food will be subject to Disciplinary measures.

Corkfeen

It's up to the parents, not some far-removed govt who are happy to either vote in awful food or declare pizza a vegetable depending on which way the wind is blowing
If they are that concerned about it publish some information - although considering that too might be along the lines of "eat more bread, the food pyramid is good for you- sponsors, what sponsors?" or "replace everything with corn syrup", maybe not

Corkfeen wrote: »

Wait, they're not genuinely categorising pizza as a vegetable, right? :P

I'm afraid so

http://www.thejournal.ie/us-congress-rules-that-pizza-is-a-vegetable-282033-Nov2011/

Amerika

Corkfeen wrote: »

How awful, expecting children to eat nutritious food rather than ****e. I'm fairly certain that most primary schools in Ireland have something along the line of this in place. The fact of the matter is that obesity is a major issue so why not get them to start eating healthy from young age so that it becomes a habit.

If this effected the outcome of the elections in a negative way which it won't. It really would be a bad reflection of the priorities of the voter.... Is it really an issue to make sure that children are eating healthily? It helps to avoid both malnutrition and obesity.

Same question... how many kids in Ireland have become fat from eating their school lunches?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

bluewolf wrote: »

It's up to the parents, not some far-removed govt who are happy to either vote in awful food or declare pizza a vegetable depending on which way the wind is blowing
If they are that concerned about it publish some information - although considering that too might be along the lines of "eat more bread, the food pyramid is good for you- sponsors, what sponsors?" or "replace everything with corn syrup", maybe not

milk - now with 50% more high fructose corn syrup

Reindeer

I know, how dare they try to remove or provide healthier alternatives to the salt, fat and sugar-ladened fast-food type choices they've had in the past. Shame on them.

Amerika

Perhaps we should force politicians, parents and teachers to have to eat a week's worth of school lunches. Then maybe the law will change LOL

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

Perhaps we should force politicians, parents and teachers to have to eat a week's worth of school lunches. Then maybe the law will change LOL

What do they get? out of interest.
and what would they prefer?

If the food is "disgusting, wilted, rotten, tasteless and inedible" then surely its the canteens fault unless Michelle Obama is your canteen lady.

Corkfeen

Amerika wrote: »

Same question... how many kids in Ireland have become fat from eating their school lunches?

Dependent on the individual parents to be honest. Some will lob any old crap into a lunchbox while others will prepare rolls. (Wholemeal rolls are lovely btw) But unfortunately whatever they have for lunch is probably a reflection of the quality of what they'll be given for dinner. If you put the parent into the habit of adapting what they're giving the children, both the child and the parent could potentially adapt their food eating and preparation to something more healthy. So it's not solely the lunch that is responsible but it is contributing to it. Admittedly, I do think the parent should be given a bit more freedom like being allowed to throw the odd treat into the lunch etc.

If it is the cafeteria at fault, they should be trained to be creative. Healthy food doesn't necessarily mean disgusting.

bluewolf wrote: »

I'm afraid so

http://www.thejournal.ie/us-congress-rules-that-pizza-is-a-vegetable-282033-Nov2011/

I vaguely remember the story but didn't realise congress had ruled on it. I wept. :pac:

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

What do they get? out of interest.
and what would they prefer?

If the food is "disgusting, wilted, rotten, tasteless and inedible" then surely its the canteens fault unless Michelle Obama is your canteen lady.

I looked at the menu and it didn’t seem all bad on paper, but the kids say the food tastes like crap because of the components, and compares nothing to what the spin-doctor school menu authors state as food. It's only been a couple of days here where I live, so I need to get a better feel from them in order to compare the actual meal to the description.

joseph brand

Michelle Obama tries to help her country, which is rife with diabetics, by introducing fresh fruit and veg to the diets of growing children. This is necessary because of all the junk they are fed. And now the parents have the hump? Unbelievable!

The problem, if the food is sub-par, is the cooks and canteen staff. They've probably never seen vegetables (bar pizza and ketchup) before and are too used to cooking 'freedom fries', burgers, nuggets and hot dogs. Take your pick and wash it all down with some fructose syrup.

Talk about 'biting the hand that feeds you'.

I can picture Ann Romney, with her head held high saying, "Let them eat cake*".


*Can be substituted with cheese burgers, hot dogs, nuggets, fries etc :pac:

Just wondering. Is it possible to order a litre of soft drink from fast food restaurants and petrol stations?

LostinKildare

Amerika wrote: »

“Why is the government telling us what we have to eat.” “I can decide for myself what to eat, stay out of my decisions.” Etc, etc…I LOVE IT (well their attitude, not the government making those decisions because they believe I can’t decide what’s best for my kids).

As a parent you can screw with most everything, just don’t screw with our kids.

I've been out of the US for a decade, and out of school for a lot longer than that, so tell me: can't children still bring their own lunches from home, or are they now required to eat shool-prepared lunches?

Amerika

LostinKildare wrote: »

I've been out of the US for a decade, and out of school for a lot longer than that, so tell me: can't children still bring their own lunches from home, or are they now required to eat shool-prepared lunches?

Yes they can bring a lunch from home. But it seems to be a matter of contention and different depending on the school districts... I’m hearing. Some schools are examining what kids are bringing and forcing them into healthier meals, some are just supplementing what the lunch from home includes, and some don’t care and let the kids eat whatever is brought from home without change. My one kid took a PB&J sandwich today, and was made to get a vegetable or fruit… which she did (slices of brown apples) which she immediately threw away. My older kid goes for the pizza, or if the line is too long and doesn’t get served in time - just goes hungry. It appears the school’s position is either eat healthy or go hungry... makes no difference to them! But parents are now being forced to prepare school lunches for their kids, and not happy with the Obamas' over it.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

joseph brand wrote: »

Michelle Obama tries to help her country, which is rife with diabetics, by introducing fresh fruit and veg to the diets of growing children. This is necessary because of all the junk they are fed. And now the parents have the hump? Unbelievable!

The problem, if the food is sub-par, is the cooks and canteen staff. They've probably never seen vegetables (bar pizza and ketchup) before and are too used to cooking 'freedom fries', burgers, nuggets and hot dogs. Take your pick and wash it all down with some fructose syrup.

Talk about 'biting the hand that feeds you'.

I can picture Ann Romney, with her head held high saying, "Let them eat cake*".


*Can be substituted with cheese burgers, hot dogs, nuggets, fries etc :pac:

Just wondering. Is it possible to order a litre of soft drink from fast food restaurants and petrol stations?

you can buy 2.5 litres of cola in shops and fast food stations all over Ireland

save us obama, save us

Amerika

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

you can buy 2.5 litres of cola in shops and fast food stations all over Ireland

save us obama, save us

Michelle Obama said she's gunning for the grocery stores to go healthy in Barack's second term. (scene from the dark back ally: Hey man... wanna buy some white bread I got here... only $5 a slice )

karma_

This is just very cheap political point scoring to be fair. Let us be honest about the problem, the US like many other countries has a major problem with obesity, so bearing that in mind, what exactly is the problem with trying to address it, especially at youth level?

joseph brand

Amerika wrote: »

Yes they can bring a lunch from home. But it seems to be a matter of contention and different depending on the school districts... I’m hearing. Some schools are examining what kids are bringing and forcing them into healthier meals, some are just supplementing what the lunch from home includes, and some don’t care and let the kids eat whatever is brought from home without change. My one kid took a PB&J sandwich today, and was made to get a vegetable or fruit… which she did (slices of brown apples) which she immediately threw away. My older kid goes for the pizza, or if the line is too long and doesn’t get served in time - just goes hungry. It appears the school’s position is either eat healthy or go hungry... makes no difference to them! But parents are now being forced to prepare school lunches for their kids, and not happy with the Obamas' over it.

Thanks for enlightening us. I'm assuming, from what you've said, that the teachers are getting the kids in choke-holds and mashing their faces into plates of rotten produce.

There's one video from 'Will it Blend' where they guy puts a Big Mac Meal into a blender. The beverage used was a milkshake. This will produce a hearty drink. Just obtain a 24oz flask and you can bypass* the governments meddling. If anyone asks, it's a 'health' drink. Vive la Révolution!

*enough of these Frankenstein shakes will result in a double, triple or quadruple bypass.

LostinKildare

Amerika wrote: »

Yes they can bring a lunch from home. But it seems to be a matter of contention and different depending on the school districts... I’m hearing. Some schools are examining what kids are bringing and forcing them into healthier meals, some are just supplementing what the lunch from home includes, and some don’t care and let the kids eat whatever is brought from home without change. My one kid took a PB&J sandwich today, and was made to get a vegetable or fruit… which she did (slices of brown apples) which she immediately threw away. My older kid goes for the pizza, or if the line is too long and doesn’t get served in time - just goes hungry. It appears the school’s position is either eat healthy or go hungry... makes no difference to them!

So, some teachers are looking at what some kids bring in their lunchboxes and telling them they need to eat a piece fruit or veg. It's always been thus! And your kid will only eat pizza, one of several dishes offered, I imagine (besides the obvious option of bringing a packed lunch), but sometimes doesn't get served because the line's too long! Oh, how awful -- clearly an oppressive govt out of control. I'd say this'll lose Obama the election, all right.

The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act has two general purposes -- 1. to up the nutritional quality of the food served in school cafeterias and vending machines (and also to allow schools to source fresh veg and fruit locally) and, more importantly, 2. to continue and expand the provision of free and/or subsidized breakfasts and/or lunches to children living in poverty. There are something like 15-20 million of them in the US, and for many children the only decent meal they get every day is in school via this govt program. Of course, it is voluntary! If it's the same as when I was a kid, poor kids get their meals free, but any kids can buy the lunches, which are very cheap because the govt subsidizes them. (I also remember that it was handled through lunch tickets so that you couldn't tell who was getting them free, to avoid stigmatizing the kids.)

Though it's been tweaked in several incarnations, the school lunch program has existed since the 1960s -- it was part of LBJ's War on Poverty. It's always been widely approved by both parties (as it was this time). Really, only the most rabid govt-haters would criticize a completely voluntary program that aims to provide nutritious meals to needy children.

Amerika wrote: »

But parents are now being forced to prepare school lunches for their kids, and not happy with the Obamas' over it.

LOL. So, you are mad at the Obamas because --- now that the govt is cleaning up its act and providing nutritious "yucky" food rather than yummy junk food --- you are being FORCED to prepare meals for your own children rather than relying on the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to provide subsidized meals to them? So you were perfectly happy for the fed govt to feed your children (acting in loco parentis!!), as long as it was feeding them the kind of crap they (and most kids) crave?

Einhard

bluewolf wrote: »

It's up to the parents, not some far-removed govt who are happy to either vote in awful food or declare pizza a vegetable depending on which way the wind is blowing

The problem though, is that obese kids aren't simply a problem for the parents involved but for society as a whole. I don't think there's anything wrong with the government seeking to implement a healthy food policy in schools, especially when such a massive proportion of the American economy is going to pay healthcare costs on obesity-related illnesses. I doubt very much that people would be so critical were the government to state that it's opposed to children smoking in schools, so why the big deal here?

Chuck Stone

Government schools trying to improve the nutrition of the kids of the fattest nation in the world?

Forget the poverty, wars, the creaking infrastructure, the medically uninsured, Wall Street banksters.. forget that..

this... this is everything that's wrong with America.

Of course school lunches should be left to the private sector. McD's, BK, KFC etc should compete for children's money. That would introduce competition and efficiency into school meal provision.

Gosh darn that meddling gubberment.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

(scene from the dark back ally: Hey man... wanna buy some white bread I got here... only $5 a slice )

You a southpark fan?

Best Clip Ever

(The episode aired on December 6, 2000)

Overheal

karma_ wrote: »

This is just very cheap political point scoring to be fair. Let us be honest about the problem, the US like many other countries has a major problem with obesity, so bearing that in mind, what exactly is the problem with trying to address it, especially at youth level?

For me the problem isn't the youth level, it's the Federal level.

It's also kinda hard to tell everyone what is the best diet for their kids: you can surely say things that are just plain not good ideas for kids (Red Bull or other HFCS drinks, just imo) but how can you honestly generalize and curve-fit nutrition for all students? Just as an extreme example, let's review the dietary requirements of one Michael Fred Phelps:

Breakfast: Three fried-egg sandwiches loaded with cheese, lettuce, tomatoes, fried onions and mayonnaise. Two cups of coffee. One five-egg omelet. One bowl of grits. Three slices of French toast topped with powdered sugar. Three chocolate-chip pancakes.
Lunch: One pound of enriched pasta. Two large ham and cheese sandwiches with mayo on white bread. Energy drinks packing 1,000 calories.
Dinner: One pound of pasta. An entire pizza. More energy drinks.

http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/08/13/the-michael-phelps-diet-dont-try-it-at-home/

And that wasn't just a case of the munchies. And there probably isn't an ounce of fat on the man. His metabolism when he is in Olympic mode is absolutely insane.

Similarly you can't reasonably expect to feed the same food to a kid who captains the soccer team as you do a narcoleptic book worm.

Besides, the "healthy options" aren't exactly cage-free or organic. They're the Diet Coke of 'healthy foods', like those allegedly healthy meals you find vacuum-sealed in the freezer aisle for $2 a piece.

Again, the problem isn't the youth level it's the Federal level. Plenty of parents assume that, oh, the schools will feed my kids and tell them what to eat. I've seen what some families eat, up to my standards its pretty base and gross. Junk, basically. If the parents aren't on board there's not much the school can do. The school only controls the child for one, maybe 2 meals a day tops and thats only if the student chooses to arrive before the start of class to get breakfast. And then, they are only in control 5 days a week. The kid eats, excluding snacks, 21 meals a week. The school is lucky to dictate even close to 10 of them, and on average they probably get a little over 5. the rest of the time it's up to the parents and that means it usually consists of coke or sweet tea and pop tarts and whatever is for dinner which can range from the good to the bad. Most parents don't budget the extra - honestly 2-3 hours a day - that it requires to generate healthy and truly good food for their kids that isn't utter crap. Try freeze-packing some otherwise fresh fruits and throw them into a blender in the morning. Add some organic peanut butter, flax, and I add in espresso. It's the way to go.

I'd actually have a bigger bone to pick with PE. PE does really nothing to teach kids anything about their body, and I dont mean the birds and the bees. It wasn't till I was an adult that a gym trainer actually bothered to explain the biology behind stretching and working your muscles, about muscle tissue and bloodflow and recovery/growth. PE, in grade school, taught me that my fingers were called Phalanges (who the fcuk needs to know this at 9 years old?) and how to play Tennis, poorly. Nobody ever explained why they were telling me to reach down to my toes and why it was supposed to hurt (which seems completely counter-intuitive until you grasp the science). Nobody explains to you really what a shin splint is or why it happens or how the only real way to address it is to keep stretching and keep up your jogging routine. Rather, they told us to do a bunch of crap, and every few weeks made us run laps, recorded us, ran fat-calipers on us, and probably treated us like lab rats to measure the average health of the nation's children.

tl;dr = they're barking up the wrong tree; let the states do it, if that; quit talking responsibility from the parents unless you plan to own the kids for more than 5 meals a day

Einhard

Einhard wrote: »

The problem though, is that obese kids aren't simply a problem for the parents involved but for society as a whole. I don't think there's anything wrong with the government seeking to implement a healthy food policy in schools, especially when such a massive proportion of the American economy is going to pay healthcare costs on obesity-related illnesses. I doubt very much that people would be so critical were the government to state that it's opposed to children smoking in schools, so why the big deal here?

The problem is that they're spending 11 billion annually and calling pizza a vegetable specifically so they can give the frozen food guys more contracts. Does that sound like they have everyone's best interests at heart?

They get it wrong and waste a substantial amount of taxpayer money in the process.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/3051/how-the-government-has-caused-america-s-obesity-problem

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Of course school lunches should be left to the private sector. McD's, BK, KFC etc should compete for children's money. .

No need; the govt are giving these things directly to the processed/unhealthy food guys anyway.
Not to mention subsiding corn syrup so it's in everything and also seems to have been linked to weight gain:
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/

"Government want to help people eat healthier" sounds lovely in theory, but when you look at the money they waste and their actual actions so far, it clearly rings very false. Or maybe they are just incompetent. Either way: bad idea.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Michelle Obama in her commitment to raise a healthier generation of kids, helped to push through the “Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010,” which was signed into law by her husband Barack Obama.

Well it just took effect with the start of this school year and has now seemingly lead to an entire generation of young anarchists. It was funny in a way. My kids were complaining about it the very first day. I said you can thank Michelle and Barack Obama for it. “NO WAY!” was their reply. “YEAH WAY!” was my response and I showed them the letter sent home from the school district noting what they were required to do because of the efforts of Michelle and Barack. Now my kids (and just about all other kids in the nation it seems) are in an uproar. The food is disgusting, wilted, rotten, tasteless and inedible, and they’re now refusing to eat most of it. “Vote Obama Out” and “Anyone But Obama” suddenly seems to be the battle cry of the school age young. They are all starting to talk like Republicans rather than Democrats-in-training. “Why is the government telling us what we have to eat.” “I can decide for myself what to eat, stay out of my decisions.” Etc, etc…I LOVE IT (well their attitude, not the government making those decisions because they believe I can’t decide what’s best for my kids).

As a parent you can screw with most everything, just don’t screw with our kids. I’ve talked to a number of parents about this, and it seems many now utilize the name “Obama” much the same as when Seinfeld said “Neuman!” in disgust.

Bad timing for an election. Surprised the media hasn’t mentioned this nationwide outcry. It’s so bad the kids would rather eat NOTHING than a school lunch. Question: How many kids have become fat eating school lunches? LOL

Wouldn’t it be a kick in the pants if Obama was ultimately defeated this election because of school kids?

So let me get this straight. You're having a go at Obama because he's trying to deal with the obesity and diabetes epidemics by introducing healthy foods to schools?

Are you actually for real?

Shock horror, kids don't want to eat healthy foods. Does that mean we as a society just give in and let them eat junk for lunch every day because that's what they want? The reason school lunches got so bad in the first places was down to lobbying by the wheat and meat packing industries. I don't think the legislation goes far enough to be honest.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

LostinKildare wrote: »

I've been out of the US for a decade, and out of school for a lot longer than that, so tell me: can't children still bring their own lunches from home, or are they now required to eat shool-prepared lunches?

Yes they can bring a lunch from home. But it seems to be a matter of contention and different depending on the school districts... I’m hearing. Some schools are examining what kids are bringing and forcing them into healthier meals, some are just supplementing what the lunch from home includes, and some don’t care and let the kids eat whatever is brought from home without change. My one kid took a PB&J sandwich today, and was made to get a vegetable or fruit… which she did (slices of brown apples) which she immediately threw away. My older kid goes for the pizza, or if the line is too long and doesn’t get served in time - just goes hungry. It appears the school’s position is either eat healthy or go hungry... makes no difference to them! But parents are now being forced to prepare school lunches for their kids, and not happy with the Obamas' over it.

Parents are being forced to do exactly ZERO.

Schools are being forced to change their meals to healthier alternatives. If parents choose to prepare different unhealhier meals for their kids it's purely and simply by choice.

Whatever happened to kids simply being disciplined to eating what their given? Yes I am a parent.

MagicMarker

Amerika wrote: »

“Why is the government telling us what we have to eat.” “I can decide for myself what to eat, stay out of my decisions.” Etc, etc…I LOVE IT (well their attitude, not the government making those decisions because they believe I can’t decide what’s best for my kids).

Well, healthier food is better for your kids than less healthier food. So presumably you'll tell your kids to be happy and smile while eating their greens..... no? Or do you let your kids dictate to you what you make for dinner every night, and then post about it on the internet telling everyone what free spirits they are, not listening to the big bad grown ups making the decisions for them?

Seriously, of all the things to complain about, this is pretty piss poor.

20Cent

I know republicans don't believe in evolution or climate change, but nutrition and a good diet!!!

southsiderosie

I don't understand what the fuss is about here. If you don't want the government feeding your kids, then send them to school with their own lunch. If you are fine with your kids eating a government-subsidized lunch, then don't complain about it. The only people who have a real complaint here are those who send their kids to schools where everyone has to eat cafeteria food.

poeticseraphim

Ireland does not do school lunches in any school i know and they must bring a lunch from home. And most principles ban junk food.

It is really a matter of common sense ...if people want to get upset about it i really think they need to prioritise.

If they do not wish to eat the food provided then they must provide their own under whatever rules the school wishes.

If they have a poblem then send their children to a private school.

If they cannot afford private school ...well then you must accept what you can afford.

And it is really nothing to do with the state.

I went to a private school, in Ireland, the rules where always much stricter than in state schools. I imagine it might be simila in the US.

I cannot believe people are gettingupset about it.....it is for the children's own health...

It is like the EU argueing over bananas.

Overheal

southsiderosie wrote: »

I don't understand what the fuss is about here. If you don't want the government feeding your kids, then send them to school with their own lunch. If you are fine with your kids eating a government-subsidized lunch, then don't complain about it. The only people who have a real complaint here are those who send their kids to schools where everyone has to eat cafeteria food.

And that taxpayers that have to pay for all the time and energy spinning wheels on the issue..

Memnoch

Overheal wrote: »

And that taxpayers that have to pay for all the time and energy spinning wheels on the issue..

You could say that about ANY tax payer funded program you don't personally agree with or that doesn't personally benefit you. That's not how a democracy works.

I don't see anything sinister or untoward about this. These meals are optional and childhood obesity resulting in diabetes is a major problem in America. Kids there get bombarded very early on by fast food companies and are brainwashed into wanting to eat crap at an age where they have no critical faculties or filters. They just repeat what they see on TV advertisements and fast food companies spend a hell of a load of money to lure them in.

I really don't see the fuss here unlles a) you work for the marketing arm of a fast food company who might make less profit if kids start eating healthier b) you're a paranoid GOP supporter that has always hated democrats and never gave Obama a chance from day one.

southsiderosie

Overheal wrote: »

And that taxpayers that have to pay for all the time and energy spinning wheels on the issue..

To be honest, I think the bigger issue with federal school lunch programs is their relation to the USDA and federal agricultural subsidies. USDA nutrition guidelines have historically been driven more by the grain and meat lobbies than science.

I do think that federally subsidized breakfast and lunch is a good thing though. I grew up attending Chicago Public Schools from second grade through high school, and 85% of the students in the CPS system are living in poverty. For many of these kids, the school breakfast and lunch may be the only a) full and b) marginally nutritionally balanced meal they will get all day. However, I think that if the point of this program is to ensure that kids get balanced meals, it would make more sense to administer it through the Department of Health and Human Services, rather than the USDA.

Amerika

This hits home much more than other Federal overreaches. We pay a lot of property taxes locally (no matter if you own or rent as the monthly rent payment includes those taxes), which directly goes to funding our local schools. Many also pay Per Capita and Earned Income Taxes which goes to the schools. Our local tax dollars also are utilized to fund the lunch programs. This is just more waste brought on to each of us by our federal government. There has always been a healthy meal offering in every lunch menu – everyone was fine with this. Now being mandated is that every lunch menu must be "healthy" because "we are incapable to make decisions for ourselves." It seems around my area the majority of the lunches are being thrown away. They just can’t force the kids to eat food that tastes terrible. Also the healthy foods are more expensive so our tax dollars will need to be raised. So now we have to pay for this wasteful program and also have to “pack” our kids lunches. In several districts, there are now several petitions from students with almost 100% agreement from the student body to end this program. This is ‘hitting home’ much more than other federal mandates, and when this type of thing is local, people are much more vocal. And the anger from the voting parents is centered directly against Michelle and Barack Obama.

Memnoch

I suspect the people who are angry at Obama for their kids' school lunches not tasting good are people who don't have much of a grip on facts or really logic.

Healthy food doesn't have to taste terrible. If it does the problem is with the school canteen, not the mandate. There is no reason a meal cannot be both healthy AND taste good.

As for letting us decide. The problem is that kids will go for the unhealthy option thanks to brainwashing by the fast food industry.

Your tax payer dollars go to a lot more than just the schools so you can rant about that if you like but it's dishonest.

Somehow I suspect you will blame Obama for anything and everything that you are unhappy about but not give him any credit for anything that might be going well in the country.

Overheal

southsiderosie wrote: »

To be honest, I think the bigger issue with federal school lunch programs is their relation to the USDA and federal agricultural subsidies. USDA nutrition guidelines have historically been driven more by the grain and meat lobbies than science.

That spade is hitting on the argument that Food = Health.

after all, food is sugar; science is high fructose corn syrup and sorbite

southsiderosie

Amerika wrote: »

This hits home much more than other Federal overreaches. We pay a lot of property taxes locally (no matter if you own or rent as the monthly rent payment includes those taxes), which directly goes to funding our local schools. Many also pay Per Capita and Earned Income Taxes which goes to the schools. Our local tax dollars also are utilized to fund the lunch programs. This is just more waste brought on to each of us by our federal government. There has always been a healthy meal offering in every lunch menu – everyone was fine with this. Now being mandated is that every lunch menu must be "healthy" because "we are incapable to make decisions for ourselves." It seems around my area the majority of the lunches are being thrown away. They just can’t force the kids to eat food that tastes terrible. Also the healthy foods are more expensive so our tax dollars will need to be raised. So now we have to pay for this wasteful program and also have to “pack” our kids lunches. In several districts, there are now several petitions from students with almost 100% agreement from the student body to end this program. This is ‘hitting home’ much more than other federal mandates, and when this type of thing is local, people are much more vocal. And the anger from the voting parents is centered directly against Michelle and Barack Obama.

Do you have any actual evidence of this being a systemic problem, or a problem in your district? I have yet to see any links in this thread. I'm also asking because in school districts that have tinkered with this kind of stuff before, the kids didn't like the meals at first because the cafeteria staff had no idea what to do with fresh ingredients. They were used to just opening pre-packaged food and reheating it. Have staff in your district been retrained?

IIRC, where healthy eating initiatives have been quite successful, they either a) have been tied to science and agricultural initiatives - so students who were more involved and more knowledgable about how food was produced were more amenable to changes in the school lunch program, or b) the school simply shifted to a salad and sandwich bar, so students had an array of healthy food but they could make individual choices instead of having a pile of overcooked broccoli dumped on their plate.

Finally, as for the financing, it is my understanding that these are changes that districts need to make if they want to be reimbursed by the federal government. So presumably they can 'opt-out' and pick up more of the tab for unhealthy lunches? Is this not the case? How does the financing actually work? Too often, state and local governments complain about federal requirements, but are unwilling to give up the funding tied to those requirements.

Amerika

Memnoch wrote: »

Your tax payer dollars go to a lot more than just the schools so you can rant about that if you like but it's dishonest.

The taxes I listed go directly to the school district (well from the local tax collector to the school district that is).

Corkfeen

Amerika, it doesn't have to be more expensive to make a healthy lunch. My eating costs are far below that of an average person but is healthier too. It tastes lovely and i've pretty much done so since I was a child. Do you really believe that all healthy food tastes 'disgusting' ? Instilling healthy habits from a young age could be extremely beneficial in the long run.

Carcharodon

Amerika wrote: »

Michelle Obama in her commitment to raise a healthier generation of kids, helped to push through the “Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010,” which was signed into law by her husband Barack Obama.

Well it just took effect with the start of this school year and has now seemingly lead to an entire generation of young anarchists. It was funny in a way. My kids were complaining about it the very first day. I said you can thank Michelle and Barack Obama for it. “NO WAY!” was their reply. “YEAH WAY!” was my response and I showed them the letter sent home from the school district noting what they were required to do because of the efforts of Michelle and Barack. Now my kids (and just about all other kids in the nation it seems) are in an uproar. The food is disgusting, wilted, rotten, tasteless and inedible, and they’re now refusing to eat most of it. “Vote Obama Out” and “Anyone But Obama” suddenly seems to be the battle cry of the school age young. They are all starting to talk like Republicans rather than Democrats-in-training. “Why is the government telling us what we have to eat.” “I can decide for myself what to eat, stay out of my decisions.” Etc, etc…I LOVE IT (well their attitude, not the government making those decisions because they believe I can’t decide what’s best for my kids).

As a parent you can screw with most everything, just don’t screw with our kids. I’ve talked to a number of parents about this, and it seems many now utilize the name “Obama” much the same as when Seinfeld said “Neuman!” in disgust.

Bad timing for an election. Surprised the media hasn’t mentioned this nationwide outcry. It’s so bad the kids would rather eat NOTHING than a school lunch. Question: How many kids have become fat eating school lunches? LOL

Wouldn’t it be a kick in the pants if Obama was ultimately defeated this election because of school kids?

There are not enough facepalms in the world to describe this, I suppose it was only a matter of time the right wing started on Michele Obama.
Feels like even the most exuberant right wingers would see sense on this issue., they will be telling us the world is flat next.

Manic Moran

Without looking at the effect of the legislation, I am going to start shooting people who come up with ridiculous names for acts.

Far too much is made of names. "How can you vote against an act named the "Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act"? Do you not want healthy hunger-free kids?". Call them "Education acts", "Agriculture acts" or whatever department they belong to. Maybe that way people will focus more on what's in them.

Overheal

Corkfeen wrote: »

Amerika, it doesn't have to be more expensive to make a healthy lunch. My eating costs are far below that of an average person but is healthier too. It tastes lovely and i've pretty much done so since I was a child. Do you really believe that all healthy food tastes 'disgusting' ? Instilling healthy habits from a young age could be extremely beneficial in the long run.

Amerika wrote:

The food is disgusting, wilted, rotten, tasteless and inedible, and they’re now refusing to eat most of it.

I think like Rosie is saying, it's down to poorly trained cafeteria workers. You know yourself if you can find your local produce stand you can find good stuff for cheap, and I normally just throw it all in a blender and make smoothies with it. Taste is easily adjusted once you **** everything into a blender. Some honey here, espresso there, add some juice, etc. - the cost of a fruit smoothie at home is far beneath any happy meal.

Whats the cost of a school lunch anyway?

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

I think like Rosie is saying, it's down to poorly trained cafeteria workers. You know yourself if you can find your local produce stand you can find good stuff for cheap, and I normally just throw it all in a blender and make smoothies with it. Taste is easily adjusted once you **** everything into a blender. Some honey here, espresso there, add some juice, etc. - the cost of a fruit smoothie at home is far beneath any happy meal.

Sorry, but in my opinion Pizza made from whole wheat dough is not very appetizing. I don’t’ see Pizza Hut offering it, do you? What’s the old saying about putting lipstick on a pig?

Whats the cost of a school lunch anyway?

Here school lunches cost only $1.75 (purchasing ala carte is more expensive), because they are heavily subsidized by our local tax dollars. I believe the actual cost to produce the meal is about double that if you include overhead costs.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

Sorry, but in my opinion Pizza made from whole wheat dough is not very appetizing. I don’t’ see Pizza Hut offering it, do you? What’s the old saying about putting lipstick on a pig?

thats a matter of preference then. and of application: try whole wheat bread or pancakes sometime

Here school lunches cost only $1.75 (purchasing ala carte is more expensive), because they are heavily subsidized by our local tax dollars. I believe the actual cost to produce the meal is about double that if you include overhead costs.

my smoothie is cheaper so

Mjollnir

Amerika wrote: »

Sorry, but in my opinion Pizza made from whole wheat dough is not very appetizing. I don’t’ see Pizza Hut offering it, do you? What’s the old saying about putting lipstick on a pig?

You don't see it? Gosh, it took me all of, oh, 4 seconds to find it.

http://www.pizzahut.com/Files/pdf/Updated%20Natural%20Nutritional%20Facts%2003.25.09.pdf

Here school lunches cost only $1.75 (purchasing ala carte is more expensive), because they are heavily subsidized by our local tax dollars. I believe the actual cost to produce the meal is about double that if you include overhead costs.

How about some facts rather than just a belief?

Brian?

Mjollnir wrote: »

You don't see it? Gosh, it took me all of, oh, 4 seconds to find it.

http://www.pizzahut.com/Files/pdf/Updated%20Natural%20Nutritional%20Facts%2003.25.09.pdf

How about some facts rather than just a belief?

I think I just figured out why Amerika loves Romney so much, neither of them can back any of their opinions with anything substantial.

Amerika, what would you like them to do about school lunches exactly? Would you simply have them go back to filling troughs with unhealthy junk? Do you think teaching balanced nutrition is a waster of time in the fattest nation in the world? I still don't get what your objection is.

Amerika

briankeating wrote: »

Amerika, what would you like them to do about school lunches exactly? Would you simply have them go back to filling troughs with unhealthy junk? Do you think teaching balanced nutrition is a waster of time in the fattest nation in the world? I still don't get what your objection is.

Doesn't anybody here have kids in the US public school system? If so lets hear from you. It's okay, the people here can handle the truth.

I would like them to offer food the kids would be willing to eat, and always have a healthy meal choice for every lunch. Do you really think the kids won't be filling up on unhealthy snacks once they get home after school, which are even worse than what they had been served in school before this overreach of the federal government?

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Doesn't anybody here have kids in the US public school system? If so lets hear from you. It's okay, the people here can handle the truth.

I would like them to offer food the kids would be willing to eat, and always have a healthy meal choice for every lunch. Do you really think the kids won't be filling up on unhealthy snacks once they get home after school, which are even worse than what they had been served in school before this overreach of the federal government?

Logical fail there. If kids are going home to gorge themselves on unhealthy snacks it makes it even more important that they are offered healthy, nutritionally balanced meals at school so at least one meal a day is positive.

How is this overreach? It's exactly the type of thing the federal government should be doing i.e. insuring a healthier future for American children.

vetinari

Agreed, I don't think Amerika underands the logical flaw in his entire argument.

The subsidized lunches is a federal program in the first place.
How changing their own program is an overreach, I'll never know.
It sounds like they changed their own program to make the food healthier.
That's it. It's amazing what people will argue about.