Over 7,000 students see their lunch debts wiped after $1 million donation
Over 7,000 students in Georgia with unpaid lunch balances are getting a helping hand following a $1 million initiative from the Arby's Foundation, the nonprofit announced Thursday.
https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/living/story/7000-students-lunch-debts-wiped-after-1-million-106710110?cid=social_twitter_abcnOpen linkView original on lemmy.world529
Comments86
Orphan crushing machine
Came in here just to find this comment, knowing it would be here, and upvote. Can't help but think the few down votes are just people that don't understand the reference. https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/orphan-crushing-machine
Thank you for this context - I needed it. I sometimes wonder if I should upvote, downvote, or ignore Orphan-Crushing Machine articles.
I had to look at the community to make sure it wasn't OrphanCrushingMachine
Beat me to it by 19 minutes
Georgia apparently would rather put 10 year olds into debt than feed children. It's the best they can do as Christians.
It is biblical. Charity to people like Paul was freely given out of love vs welfare-taxation system we have now.
Of course a good person who was a Christian could reason out
"Paul was in Rome so he must have seen the free donations of food given by the emperor to the city's poor but didn't comment on it. Which meant that when he talks about charity he is talking about a supplement, yes a supplement not a first response, to actual effective large scale operations. I should be happy with both. A good government that works hard that I add too. Not a bad government I helped create and stick a bandaid on by throwing a twenty in the collection plate".
A pity this doesn't seem to occur to them. Despite the theological wiggle room.
Sad that this is even a thing. The richest nation on earth should be able to give its future 2 square meals a day.
But that would set them up with unreasonable expectations for adulthood! Gotta prepare them for their future of struggling to get by.
School lunch debt is the so incredibly dystopian that I hope 20-30 years from now people will have to use an internet search to find out what it meant to people in this decade. Like it’s so unabashedly wrong as a thing, I hope we look at like when Bayer made heroin and bloodletting was in practice.
One of the orphans jammed the machine.
Want stopped, just pushed back
Jesus Christ. Students now have debts before they even leave high school? Cool.
in capitalism, by the time you were put into this world, you already have a fuck ton of debt
Unfortunately true.
Pretty soon it will be the norm that when you graduate high school you take your first bankruptcy and clean your slate before your life really starts to matter. Hell it's only 7 years, you got 4 years of college so only 3 more till you can start living again! Well I guess after you somehow pay off those new college loans as well.
Just like in Christianity we are all born with sin, in America we are all born with debt.
Some before they leave elementary
No, parents.
Yet another dystopic horror disguised as a feel-good story.
Does this qualify as aboringdystopia content?
Sure does.
Something something boring dystopia
Peak orphan crushing machine
Lunch debt …
what the fuck is a lunch debt???
States that opted out of federal funding for school lunches (because fuck them poor kids) let hungry children run up a tab on cafeteria lunches. Then they punish and publicly shame them for not paying. Why? FREEDOM. 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸
https://soeonline.american.edu/blog/what-is-lunch-shaming/
God damn, they took the kids food back and threw it away.
What fucking assholes to put a child through that. Embarrassing.
Waitwaitwait excusmethefuckwhat?
HOW the hell did USA happen into an idea of putting goddamn KIDS into debt?! I mean, I live in EU. In my country, there were school-run lunches...or rather dinners, anyway. These were paid upfront, once per month, at overall small price (still somewhat pricey, but actual alternative for families that didn't want to pack sandwiches for their kids.)
But ALSO! Wtf USA? If lunch is such a problem, why not, dunno, make your child lunch for school at home?
I cannot wrap my head around this. It's weird. Too weird.
The families in question don't have the time or money to serve breakfast and pack lunches, both parents work multiple jobs to make ends not quite meet, type of situation. School meals are a convenience for middle/upper class families and a life preserver for low income/food insecure families. For a lot of those kids it's the only meals they get that day.
At my school growing up we had the pre paid lunch cards in a file at the start of the lunch line, the lunch card lady would find and punch your card when you went through. The "free lunch" cards were a different color than the "pre paid lunch" cards, which some of the parents worried was causing embarrassment for the children on food assistance. So the PTA voted to make them all the same color, with no way for kids to see if other kids qualified for free lunches.
That's the difference between conservative and progressive states. As of last year in California all schools are required to offer breakfast and lunch to all children regardless of ability to pay. In my area (of California) there are stations set up daily through out the summer break to distribute sack lunches for kids who don't eat when they don't go to school.
Conservative states literally refuse free money from the federal government for these programs (the states do have to put up some money for it too) because they don't think that anyone should get "something for nothing" including hungry children. To the point that these kids get their food thrown in the trash after they've been served, by grown up bullies who work for the school. Because that's what Jesus would do.
Only meal a day...
You know what, the more I read the more I believe that ya all live in some sort of dysfunctioning dystopia. First thought was "then why won't they move somewhere cheaper" but I guess in USA it may be not possible, am I right?
I mean, in what hellish place both parents have to take more than one job just to survive? One of them wpuld be understandable. One struggling with many while other stays at home too. But both? WTF.
Anyway, thanks for comment, ot was informative if not depressing.
It's the cost of hosting a lanch party
Food is a human right..
"Lunch Debt" ... jesus christ
"Then he took the seven loaves and the fish, and when he had given thanks, he broke them and gave them to the disciples, and they in turn gave to the people. They all ate and were satisfied. Afterward, they were all given invoices and in his majestic mercy he allowed them all an extra 30 days to pay."
Matthew 15:32
Every day we are drifting further and further from supply side Jesus
i thought American kids got free school lunches?
There is a federal lunch subsidy program, and many states also have their own lunch programs. The program even extends through the summer.
Several caveats.
First, not every state participates. This is free money that states could use to feed hungry kids, and some states are just like "nah, fuck them kids."
Second, parents generally have to apply for the program. You fill out some forms, and the kids get subsidized lunches. That's a problem, because not every parent knows the programs exist, not every parent speaks English or Spanish or another language the school might be thoughtful enough to have the forms translated into. At my kids' elementary school, during Covid, we learned that there are 32 different first languages spoken in the homes of students. Sharing information is a problem.
Third, the subsidized lunch is often a lesser meal than what the paying kids get. It might be a cheese and white bread sandwich, an apple sauce, and some milk. Now, sure, if you're hungry, food is better than no food. But kids know what the brown bag lunch means. It's embarrassing, creates division across income levels, and can encourage some hungry kids to choose not to accept the food rather than face ridicule.
But you know what's amazing? During Covid, school meal providers were facing financial ruin. They had contracts to provide food for a bunch of kids that weren't in the schools. Sysco and Aramark and many others were staring at a total loss for all of their school lunch programs, and the government bailed them out. The state and federal governments found a way to pay for all the school lunches and give them away for free to all students in every state. There wasn't even a debate, and no politicians opposed it.
The money was just there, no strings or hoops or pork barrel haggling. Major industry is facing crisis, and suddenly we can afford to feed all the kids, no exceptions, no forms or paperwork. Local food banks were overflowing with frozen meals and fresh produce and all the tiny cartons of milk you can imagine.
Now, you could say that Covid was an emergency, that the collapse of the school lunch industry would have horrible economic ramifications, and that would be true.
But it wasn't even expensive, and that was for everybody. There's no reason we could not afford to provide free lunches to any child in America who asks for it, and I mean a real lunch. The same thing the kid who paid is getting. School cafeterias throw away more food than the value of food given away as part of free lunch programs AND unpaid lunch debts combined. Feeding every child would be a rounding error, and nobody would be stigmatized or penalized because their parents couldn't afford their lunch.
Hungry kids don't learn. Feed them all.
Alabama, Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont and Wyoming.
The program requires states to pay half of the administrative costs - not the benefit itself, just the costs associated with distributing the benefit.
The federal free lunch program would have brought $18,000,000 to the state, at a total cost of $300,000 to the state. The governor refused the program, saying "I don't believe in welfare."
Nebraska receives $1,100,000,000 per year in agricultural subsidies. He doesn't have a problem taking federal dollars to feed pigs, but kids are on their own.
Hey, just because they are Nebraska politicians, doesn't mean they deserve to starve. :P
wow that's super fucked up
Thank you so much - this was excellently stated and I couldn't agree with you more.
So fucking tired of this.
Privatize the gains, socialize the losses.
This is bullshit.
You know, I'm ok with this one. Hungry kids got to eat. The problem is that we stopped so that the lunch programs could go back to the more profitable paid system.
Government can and should do things to support the economy in times of crisis. But the money should flow through the citizens, not be paid directly to industries. Give the money to schools and communities to pay off their lunch contracts, and let the schools distribute the food. That's a good bailout. Imagine if, during the housing crash, we had given money to every taxpayer to pay their rent or mortgage. The banks would have been bailed out, prices wouldn't have crashed as hard, defaults would have dropped dramatically, and we would all be in a little less debt.
Whoa now buddy. Can't have that socialism in muh murica. How else will these poor for profit institutions keep posting record profits?
*edit In some places maybe... but that and may other services have been gutted. sadly.
wow this is sad.
Lol
Only in a few states, like Minnesota.
I hate seeing these articles as if those people should be thankful for the kindness of some random person instead of being angry that school lunch debt is something that actually exists.
I fucking hate massive corporations laundering their reputations like this. If they cared, they'd lobby for higher taxes on the rich to pay for free school meals and a bazillion other things that govt should provide but doesn't.
Exactly. Not to mention that there are states that had minor increases on the wealthiest of the state and made school lunches free. This country is abysmal.
This is also important to remember too, hopefully enough people realize it's an attempt at a pr boost.
I can do both. But I understand the point of view.
Why can't both be happening. Don't assume that they aren't aware and bothered by the school systems way of doing things.
children having lunch debt isnt a thing that should exist in the supposedly richest country in the world.
and it shouldnt be reliant upon kind and generous donations for them to be fed.
for fucks sake, I'm tired of these stories made to look as feel good stories when they are nothing but documentation of the decline of our civilization.
"Oh, yes, children. You can't eat today because you are poor, lest some generous noble allows it with a meager donation of a fraction of their wealth"
Malnutrition leads to all kinds of cognitive problems or developmental issues, which just increases the burden on society later from medical or social issues developed by such people. Lunch debt is a shitty, gross concept and I hate living in a world where it exists.
What a world we live in, where charities have to step in to stop children going into debt over school lunches...
You'd think that one of the wealthiest governments in the world would have a better solution to this problem by now than relying on charity
This with their slogan "we've got the meats" and there is a good cannibalism joke somewhere in there.
Yes, charity is great. Fixing society level problems with society level solutions is better. We need to get salaries higher and limit the cost of living increases. For food the best way is to stop paying farmers to under produce and instead work on getting the price to move food down. Let the price for food rush to the bottom and at the same time increase the salaries of everyone on the bottom.
Yeah, I was thinking for what arby’s pays lobbyists to avoid taxes and wage increases, they could lobby once more for higher wages, higher taxes on wealthy and corporations, lower retail cost, and more government dollars for free, comprehensive, quality food, education and healthcare and just fix the problem. The C employees and board wouldn’t even have to do without another yacht to do it, just budget better.
It's a clash of two worldviews. The purest form of capitalism believes that the individual is selfish and thinks only of himself. Therefore, it's up to the individual to succeed no matter what, relying only on himself.
On the other hand, we have the Scandinavian system, where the individual is not inherently selfish, but selfless, it's all about reciprocity, helping each other.
To me, the purest form of capitalism is pure evil. It sees the world as half empty instead of half full.
Lunch debt should not be a thing.
I highly disagree, because the purest form of capitalism expects there to be rules and safeguards against exactly that. I may be biased, because to me Rhine Capitalism is the purest form, as the markets itself are completely free to define prices and have open and fair competitions, leading to egalitarian distribution of goods.
However, as society grows more selfish, sadly it doesn't work anymore. Like democracy and various other forms or organisation.
Um, bullshit. Pure capitalism is entirely unregulated. Regulation, fair trade, prohibitions against monopolies and anticompetitive practices, labor rights, those are all socialist additions.
The US does regulate the hell out of unions though. Right to Work is a regulation twisting the free market. So is the prohibition on solidarity strikes.
Yes indeed. Thank you, socialism.
Maybe in the U.S., everyone else around the world, doesn't consider these to be "socialist" additions.
Rich people and corporate wanted their disproportionate wages and tax burdens.
Because Republicans refuse to fund school lunches for poor kids.
They didn't.
So... an average of $27 per student in Atlanta area and $17 elsewhere. And the school districts can't just tell students to not worry about it?
Schools are underfunded, so it shouldn't be up to them to shoulder the cost.
It was only 200k and the other 800k is supposed to go to other schools across the country
because the united states cant afford to feed its children. build and sell F35, sure. feed children? negative. gotta have priorities.
This is local legislation, not federal budgets.
ha yep, you are absolutely correct. if only there was some national way to solve for this
I know right?
almost like at the national level we can somehow build billion dollar f35s (the program et al) and sell them... but we cant solve for startving kids in our states..
I get it.
But: “sTaTeS rI-yUtS”
duude right?! half these problems exist because these jerk states refuse/reject the funding for the purpose. like healthcare subsidies.. nope, not these hurting poor people. let them suffer.
They just get a piece of hydrogenated oil between two slices of white bread or nothing, until it’s paid. Don’t give them ideas.
No interest. It's dystopian enough as-is.
Lunch debt shouldn’t be a thing. I don’t mind paying a little more on my school taxes so that every child at school eats for free.
Tax write off
Even as a tax right-off it costs money. For instance about ⅓ of my income goes to taxes, so every $100 I donate to charity results in me saving about $33 in taxes. So a $100 donation only costs me about $67. It still costs me, and it still costs companies real money who make charitable contributions. They should be recognized for it.
It also does a lot to help them keep their "meager" profit margins that they artificially keep low to avoid paying taxes in the first place.
How about we get all the extra money that taxing would give us and then charity can be given out afterwards. Yes it costs them money but they already aren't paying their fair share.