All TPS Students to get free breakfasts!

Will they serve pink slime?

The program is also a financial winner for TPS. While it may seem antithetical to say offering food for free will make the district money, it works because of how the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s free- and reduced-meal program reimburses districts. Schools only get money when a student eats a meal, and they get more in reimbursements for breakfasts than the food actually costs.

Each subsidized student who eats a breakfast makes TPS money.

This is one of the parts that boggles my mind.

The USDA reimburses TPS more than the food actually costs to provide. Why?

No wonder TPS is offering the food to everyone. The more subsidized kids they can get to show up for breakfast, the more money TPS makes. If a few non-subsidized kids happen to eat breakfast, it just comes out of the profits.

No wonder why they are offering the "free" breakfasts - it's a money maker!

I wonder how many of the students will dine and dash.

Okay - besides the idiocy of the federal government program, I'm highly skeptical of TPS's ability to manage the program based upon their most recent audit and management letter. I did several posts on the findings (here: http://thurbersthoughts.blogspot.com/2012/05/tps-audit-shows-troubling-issues.html and here: http://thurbersthoughts.blogspot.com/2012/05/troubling-tps-management-letter-part-2.html) and these are the highlights:

Considering TPS was "surprised" by $8.58 million more in surplus than they expected, resulting in an $11.22 million carryover into the 2012-13 school year (http://thurbersthoughts.blogspot.com/2012/08/with-1122-million-surplus-tps-doesnt.html), I can't help but wonder if the numbers on this particular program are entirely accurate.

And what happens if the federal government changes the reimbursement? What then?

no... not an idea situation by a long shot... and hardly something we would like to put this or any school district in charge of running. there are idiot parents; how they got to be idiots can be debated ad nauseum; but giving the kids a bit of a fighting chance to succeed is a laudable goal. you gotta try... looks like this is the current thing to try... good luck

With the extra food stamps, their parents can buy more booze, drugs, and lottery tickets.

From a comment from a Blade reader below. I am not sure if I should puke or roll over laughing!

"No it's not....they're not giving free stuff to everyone...just feeding breakfast to children and studies show kids learn better if they eat in the morning....so sounds like a smart idea to me."

Oh, and here I was thinking "oh, that might be a good thing for the kids. Maybe it'll help TPS students to start the day off with a good meal that they might not be able to get at home." My bad, I forgot this was where we are supposed to be superior assholes.

endcycle-Wait, I thought that was the point of Toledo talk... Am I in the wrong place? I may need to re-calibrate my moral compass

"For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’

Then the righteous will answer him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?'

And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.'"
(Matthew 25.35-40 ESV)

((leave it to the hardcore atheist to preach jesus' word, but man... sometimes people need to be reminded that poor people are people too. even foodstamps-using poor, or people addicted to drugs, or out-of-work single parents, or whatever else.))

Quite possibly the funniest (and most accurate) thing I've read today.

Sorry... (My rebuttal below)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

Oh and another fave, for those of you so disgusted by the idea that the poorest school district in the area might be able to feed some kids from Romans 12:20 -

“if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.”

But that all said, it must feel SO much better to sit in judgement of... let's see, how was it put by some of you?
"With the extra food stamps, their parents can buy more booze, drugs, and lottery tickets."

"Meanwhile, the Park Service, also part of the Department of Agriculture, asks us to “Please Do Not Feed the Animals” because the animals may grow dependent and not learn to take care of themselves."

"Just one less thing for irresponsible parents to have to worry about! Oh joy."

Pathetic.

Oh and just in case new testament stuff isn't good enough, there's this gem from the bronze age:

"There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land." Deuteronomy 15:11

“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
― Benjamin Franklin

I might also add that if you observe what is happening in the inner city not only does making provisions for the poor cause more material poverty but it also causes a very deep poverty of the soul where people feel like they have no worth a a man or woman that does not value himself cannot value others.

One of the comments on the Blade article:

No wonder our government is broke. We're paying to feed children who don't need the free meal to make the other kids "feel good".

endcycle, I've watched people like you cry about helping poverty-stricken people all my life.

The only that has changed is the number of poverty-stricken people has increased.

The solution is that instead of asking the rest of us for help, people who cannot afford to feed their kids, should quit having them.

Thank you for the Republican talking point, I got that in a FW: FW: FW: email from my Tea-tarded uncle

The Founding Fathers quite liked the status quo of being people in power and making sure the peons stayed peons. Why else was slavery kept legal?

The number of poor people increased, you say?

The rich got richer, too. Don't forget that. Don't forget that we had a certain political party force a downgrade in the nation's credit just to try to score political points against the sitting President. Don't forget the number of homes foreclosed upon and the jobs sent overseas so one of the Presidential candidates could have a dancing horse and an IRA worth up to $100M.

Maybe the solution is to accept that the wealth that was supposed to "trickle down" according to a certain political party and their pet economic theory hasn't, and that we should do something about that.

Or we could go force sterilizations on poor people, cancel welfare, cancel unemployment benefits, revoke the minimum wage, and find something for all the poor people to do, like maybe be turned into Soylent Green.

I know some lazy poor people collecting benefits. I also know some talented people looking for jobs or who lost their jobs because some douchebag millionaire or billionaire decided he needed to buy another mansion, a jet, and a sports team, ON TOP of buying some politicians, so they cut jobs or chose to outsource instead of hiring Americans.

Guess which group is the larger group.

The number of people with Stockholm Syndrome, defending the people who fired them, on this board is astounding.

"... for those of you so disgusted by the idea that the poorest school district in the area might be able to feed some kids ..."

endcycle, provide the stats to support your claim that TPS is the poorest school district in the area.

AC, I don't need you to remind me of that or anything else, but thanks for repeating your usual verses against the rich.

We are spending more helping poor people than we ever have. Which has caused many who were just above the poverty level, to do less until they qualified for the freebies.

I am replacing front brake pads tomorrow. Since times are tough, I wonder if TPS would reimburse me for the pads and install them for me if I drove it over to the TPS motor pool? Maybe some gas money or a free TARTA pass for the trip back and forth?

I don't hear anyone arguing about the free/reduced-price meal program that already existed for qualified students.

People seem to be more up in arms about giving breakfast to all students district-wide.

AC, I know some lazy people collecting benefits as well as talented people looking for work as well. However, I have never witnessed so much casual acceptance by people to remain in an unfortunate station without climbing out on their own or who do not instinctively look to their own resources to provide their needs even if those resources are uncomfortable or cause great strain and effort.

A few family members collaborated with my Grandfather to write his memoirs about growing up in the great depression. I know these are different times, especially being a non-agricultural society but my Grandfather and many like him did everything to help support their families. I know... the Government stepped in at that time too but that generation molded itself and had value because of the struggle they would not accept. This generation will never have value if they are refunded for every mistake they make or are continually supported by others.

"By offering the food free to every student, TPS officials said, poor students don’t feel stigmatized about using federal subsidies."

But breakfast won't be enough! Studies will appear that prove that if TPS expanded the program to include lunch and dinner, some goal can be achieved.

It would be cheaper in the long run if we paid the non poor kids a $5 exploitation fee per meal for the valuable service of eating with the stigmatized poor kids. The poor kids will then claim to NOT be poor and apply for the $5 exploitation fee. Program dies in 2 weeks!

Back to reality... if the stigmatized poor kids banned together and stigmatized the non poor kids for participating and eating the food provided in the food stigmatization eradication program (aka Obama's Pantry), then the Feds could afford to borrow the money to feed the stigmatized poor kids lunch and dinner. But NO, once again the filthy rich people with their tax paying jobs are riding on the coattails of the poor and literally taking the food out of poor children's mouths. Suddenly the words ("By offering the food free to every student, TPS officials said, poor students don’t feel stigmatized about using federal subsidies.") will be forgotten.

Oh btw we are almost 16 trillion in debt, when we become Greece we can feed everyone by eating "the rich" right?

Well hell lets just print more money to make the money we have worth even less.

Freebies for all!

Tps is about 75 percent free and reduced, so while every student is now getting free food, most were already eligible
I have to laugh at people making arguments about how giving kids this food for free provides an incentive against work, as I'd 10 year olds ever pay for their own food.

"And then you go and prove your philosophy by throwing Bible verses in everyone's face. You're so Christian..."

I'm absolutely not a christian. I wouldn't ever claim to be, nor would I like to be mistaken for one. I'm an atheist. 100%, totally godless kinda guy.

"Oh btw we are almost 16 trillion in debt, when we become Greece we can feed everyone by eating "the rich" right?"
As someone who might know a bit more about economics than you do, let's just say that we're nowhere near becoming Greece and the idea that you think helping kids with a free meal might put us there?

Guess which parts of our spending / taxation changes over the last, oh... 12 years have changed the projected surpluses to deficits? HINT: it ain't education, buddy. nowhere near it. Military actions and tax cuts. Need proof of that, go look it up on the CBO site- it's pretty clearly laid out.

"AC, I know some lazy people collecting benefits as well as talented people looking for work as well. However, I have never witnessed so much casual acceptance by people to remain in an unfortunate station without climbing out on their own or who do not instinctively look to their own resources to provide their needs even if those resources are uncomfortable or cause great strain and effort."

Speaking as someone who has actually BEEN on welfare at one point, I can tell you that I've never witnessed people trying harder to survive than families accepting aid. I don't know what you claim to have witnessed, but having been on the inside and also knowing people who have worked in that system, I can tell you that your perception is (anecdotally at least) wrong.

"endcycle, provide the stats to support your claim that TPS is the poorest school district in the area."

In terms of per-student spending, it's not. I apologize, I completely blew what I was trying to say- what I should have said was that the population that attends TPS includes the poorest people in the area. My mistake.

"endcycle, I've watched people like you cry about helping poverty-stricken people all my life.

The only that has changed is the number of poverty-stricken people has increased.

The solution is that instead of asking the rest of us for help, people who cannot afford to feed their kids, should quit having them."

Eugenics programs maybe? Not a bad idea, I wonder if anyone's ever tried that before?

"I might also add that if you observe what is happening in the inner city not only does making provisions for the poor cause more material poverty but it also causes a very deep poverty of the soul where people feel like they have no worth a a man or woman that does not value himself cannot value others."

Spoken like someone who has no idea what it is to need real help. The value of a man or woman is determined by a lot more than if they accept help when they need it.

I'm surprised that more people aren't questioning the fact that the USDA reimburses the school more than the actual cost per breakfast. And less than the actual cost per subsidized lunch.

How does that make any sense?

Give a man a fish and he'll eat for one day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll spend every single day sitting in a boat drinking beer.

This is about feeding public school students breakfast, at least on the surface. Dig a little deeper and I think you'll find that what this really is all about is a tax levy and the avarice of the Toledo Public School system.

My thanks to Maggie Thurber for writing her articles on TPS, which should be required reading before anyone actually votes on the new TPS levy.

There are no actions being taken by the students that irritate me. Among other things It is this continual barrage of efforts to suck people into a vacuum of Government dependence that irks me – often for the purpose of funding a dysfunctional system like TPS or pandering for votes. It is one of the most severe, cunning forms of rape that these agencies could perform, and they do it under the guise of charity. Meanwhile the families that are supposedly being “helped” continually sink into a deeper pit of despair that renews itself generation after generation. The sad thing is that dysfunctional agencies like TPS and political parties that pander to this cycle RELY on this despair. That is why my commentary above focuses on people recognizing that they possess skills to pull themselves and their families out of the morass – until they stand up for themselves and separate themselves from this fake charity they are doomed! The agencies that should be teaching families to get out of the poverty cycle now seek to further press them down further by indoctrinating the next generation of poor and insuring the next generation of voters who vote on the side of their party and cause. It is absolutely evident in the statement from the article below.

“The free-food offer for every student, TPS officials said, will relieve the potential stigma poor students feel about using federal subsidies.”

"The program is also a financial winner for TPS. While it may seem antithetical to say offering food for free will make the district money, it works because of how the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s free- and reduced-meal program reimburses districts. Schools only get money when a student eats a meal, and they get more in reimbursements for breakfasts than the food actually costs.

Each subsidized student who eats a breakfast makes TPS money."

See, this is part of the problem, seems like people still don't believe there IS no free lunch, or in this case breakfast. People don't seem to grasp the concept that the government doesn't have any money that they didn't take from someone who WORKED for it. It's not government money, it's OUR money. Of course, if you pay no taxes anyway........

I regret reading this particular thread. The inhumanity is disheartening.

endcycle

Those biblical quotes are the backbone of how I was raised. And I try to live by them today.

I will not pass judgment on all TPS students getting free breakfast. But those who are needy it is a tool they need to stay in school. In my humble opinion children should not have to pay for the sins of their parents. Period.

Jackie writes: "In my humble opinion children should not have to pay for the sins of their parents. Period."

NOR SHOULD I PAY FOR THEIR SINS!

endcycle I fully understand how both parties sunk this country into debt and if you don't believe we are anything like Greece than you disagree with many prominent writers & scholars on the issue. No school food programs didn't put us into this problem but we have to either elect leaders who are serious about the problem (neither Romney or Obama are) or stop the handouts, we have to choose.

We currently have a 101% debt to GDP, Greece as at 130 when they popped. If we continue spending at current levels we will hit the same ratios in about 10 years. By 2016, Greece’s debt-to-GDP ratio is predicted to be 145.5% compared with 111.9% for the U.S.

From Is America the new Greece?:

According to IMF calculations, no more than half the spending cuts and tax increases that are needed to reduce the government's debt to pre-financial crisis levels (around 60% of GDP) by 2030 have been proposed. House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., wants $6 trillion in cuts over 10 years; the president wants $4 trillion in savings over 12 years.

The IMF estimates that -- after accounting for age-related spending on entitlements -- the federal budget would need to be slashed by nearly $12 trillion by 2020 to reach pre-crisis levels.

Compare that number with the much-ballyhooed $38 billion "cut" from the 2011 budget agreement hammered out two weeks ago to avoid a government shutdown. This was voodoo austerity. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that actual reductions in spending amount to only $352 million, or 0.002% of GDP.
________________________________________________________

Hell if neither party is going to do anything about the problem (which they are not) then lets not just give them breakfast but buy them all cars, boats, and vacations homes for A's on their report cards too.

"Absolutely, but we are NOT objecting to those who desperately need this." You may not be, but many are:

"Jackie writes: "In my humble opinion children should not have to pay for the sins of their parents. Period."

NOR SHOULD I PAY FOR THEIR SINS!"

"It's not government money, it's OUR money. Of course, if you pay no taxes anyway........"

"Among other things It is this continual barrage of efforts to suck people into a vacuum of Government dependence that irks me "

""I might also add that if you observe what is happening in the inner city not only does making provisions for the poor cause more material poverty but it also causes a very deep poverty of the soul where people feel like they have no worth a a man or woman that does not value himself cannot value others."

"I have never witnessed so much casual acceptance by people to remain in an unfortunate station without climbing out on their own or who do not instinctively look to their own resources to provide their needs even if those resources are uncomfortable or cause great strain and effort."

"This generation will never have value if they are refunded for every mistake they make or are continually supported by others."

"The solution is that instead of asking the rest of us for help, people who cannot afford to feed their kids, should quit having them."

"With the extra food stamps, their parents can buy more booze, drugs, and lottery tickets."

"Just one less thing for irresponsible parents to have to worry about! Oh joy."

<OHT, these are the kinds of comments i find disheartening, you know the fu*k everyone else, all i care about is myself attitude. I never said i agree with the policy itself.

tm2

A humanitarian I might be and I do not apologize for that at all. It was how I was raised by my parents. And how I try to live my life.

Whatever I am lucky to have I know it is the right thing to do to share with those less fortunate.

What should we do with the children who are so poor they need food to attend school? Debtor's prison for parents...let them eat cake...

I do not apologize for how I feel about those less fortunate.

What should we do with the children who are so poor they need food to attend school?

Free and reduced-priced lunch and breakfast programs already existed for those children.

Jackie, my post wasn't intended towards you, it was someone's reply to your post that irritated me. I also don't apologize for being a caring person, but as you can see, that is a quality that is quickly becoming extinct.

God I gotta get out of this City!

<Laughing at how naive some people are>

If you believe that TPS is a credible almoner to disperse money on your behalf (while truly only acting on their own interest).. more power to you.

My compassion just does not equal that of... <laugh> TPS...

TPS is 78 percent free or reduced. The kids who will eat these meals are poor.

tm2

I was just responding to your remarks which you copied from other TT'ers.

Dannes

I do not live in the TPS district but my feeling are the same for all.

You really have to walk in someone shoes before you make comments on how they see life.

I just want to be clear that I am not against making sure that poor, truly hungry children receive food.

However, this story has brought some facts to light that bother me.

For example, the fact that the schools can make a profit off breakfast subsidies from the USDA, and that schools take a loss on the subsidized lunches.

Those and other financial issues brought to light would make it appear that these programs are not being run properly, and that there is wasteful spending.

Wasteful because the funds aren't being used efficiently, not wasteful because we're feeding hungry kids.

The way this is being presented is trying to dupe people into feeling like this is a big warm fuzzy "ooh...we're feeding hungry kids" instead of looking at the larger picture of how the funds are being used.

If you think about it, there might be more money available to feed and educate poor children if the funds that we do have were being properly managed in the first place.

Mom2: TPS subsidizes its food service program by more than $1 million a year, in large part because USDA subsidy rates are less than the costs of food.

Oh mom2, what do you know? You're nothing but an evil rich suburbanite who doesn't care about others. <snort> <eyeroll>

Here's my question... I know for a fact that several school districts in NW Ohio have a policy where, if a child who is not on a free or reduced lunch plan forgets their lunch money, they are provided a free PB sandwich for lunch but denied a full meal. Does TPS have this kind of policy too? If a "rich" kid comes to school a few times without his lunch money or his parents forget to pre-pay his lunch card, will he be forced to have a measly sandwich while the "poor" kids get a taxpayer-funded hot lunch?

Now I'm off to find a few puppies to kick while I'm waiting for an answer...

I think I love you, Foodie.

For lunches.

But the article clearly states that they are reimbursed more than the cost of food for breakfasts.

Why do you think they are trying to increase the number of students eating breakfasts? To help make up the lunch shortfall.

Is this the same compassionate TPS that took away bus services from "the children" until they got more grant money?

Argh!

Yes. Lunches are more expensive than breakfasts.

You are completely missing the point.

What is your point?

Seriously? Wow.

1) The USDA lunch subsidy is set at a rate that does not cover food costs, which means that it costs the district $1 million a year to provide subsidized lunches.

2) The USDA breakfast subsidy is set at a rate that is greater than the cost of food. The district can make enough of a profit to absorb the cost of providing breakfast to all students.

Your response? "Lunches are more expensive than breakfast." Irrelevant.

The issue is that the USDA subsidy rates are not tied to the cost of the food.

The district should not take a loss on lunches, but they shouldn't profit on breakfast either.

^^

Not adequately tied to the cost of providing the meal, I should say.

Your original post used the vauge term "these programs" and didn't specify that you were saying the USDA are not run properly. Your post could have been read to say that tps was not using funds efficiently.

Can anyone explain this?

TPS lunch prices are as follows:
(Source )

Elementary (full price) - $1.60
High School (full price) - $2.00

The reduced price rate is 40 cents.

(That's the rate currently listed on the TPS website - I don't know if it has been updated for 2012-2013 yet.)

The USDA lunch subsidies for the 2012-2013 school year are as follows:
(Source )

For schools with a 60% or greater free/reduced lunch rate:

Free lunches reimbursed at $2.88
Reduced price lunches reimbursed at $2.48
Paid lunches reimbursed at $0.29

(Some schools may qualify for an additional 6 cents per meal. I do not know if TPS qualifies for that, so I only used the base rate.)

________________________________________

Unless I'm missing something, it would appear that the USDA reimbursement per lunch is greater than what TPS charges for the "full price" lunches.

If the USDA reimbursement doesn't cover the cost of providing the food, then the lunch prices set by the district certainly don't cover the cost either.

Fair enough. Truthfully, it could be some combination of the two.

We can't say for sure that TPS is managing food costs efficiently. Especially given that they aren't exactly known for prudent management of other funds.

However, it still seems like there's something off with the way that the USDA sets the subsidy. Seems odd that a district can "profit" off one meal, but lose on the other.

<$3 per lunch doesn't exactly give the district a lot to work with, so I wouldn't try to place all the blame on the school.

I certainly wouldn't want to be the person responsible for coming up with a school lunch menu that would be healthy and edible, yet not cost too much.

LOL at the 40 cents reduced rate lunches. That's the same price I remember it being 30 years ago. Meanwhile, the cost of the full price lunch has doubled. Also, it probably isn't unreasonable to assume the % of TPS students qualifying for free bf and lunch has at least doubled during the past 30 years.

Why stop with only free bf? Why not give every student free lunch too, and save the time and costs processing the paperwork.

It won't be long until more than 90% of TPS students are below the poverty line anyway.

The above Foodie post @ 4:15 is a slam dunk.

"I regret reading this particular thread. The inhumanity is disheartening."

Spoken like a true liberal. Liberals love to act like they are SO sympathetic/charitable, and to prove it, they will help those unfortunate people........with someone else's money.

A video for all the Toledo Talk humanitarians/suckers.

Explicit version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzspsovNvII&list=SP25D11309EA4CC4CD&index=3&feature=plcp

I may be a Toledo Talk humanitarian but I resent being called a sucker!

oh, so this is where they keep the tea partiers...

To those of you that so accurately describe the people that enjoy the fruits of your labor:
Your characterization/ generalization of the possible recipient of the funding doesn't move the conversation forward. It's a cartoonish swipe at a population that clearly isn't well represented amongst the posters here.

The arguments against, while they may be valid, are immediately discredited by the implication that some people deserve this sort of support because they fell on hard times and may be down on their luck vs. the people that just sap from society. Or maybe you don't make the distinction, but your stomach is turned by the thoughts of these people.

Take all emotion out of your arguments. Ask and answer these questions-

Can TPS afford this?
What happens to these kids if they aren't given this program?
What sort of benefits to the community (i.e.helping TPS test scores, which helps stabilize home values) could be extrapolated from such a program? Or is this just a good Samaritan move?
If TPS doesn't have funding, and this is identified as a need, has anyone approached local business to donate or set up a charitable organization?

Leave emotion at the door, you may be able to intelligently address and solve some of these problems rather than getting readers of TT to yell "yeah!" into their computer screens.

:)

******************************************************************************************************************************************************************
"By offering the food free to every student, TPS officials said, poor students don’t feel stigmatized about using federal subsidies."
******************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Logically speaking, we can pay for the program as is, if all participants parents/guardians have their Federal child tax credits and deductions taken away from tax returns and re-distributed to the program.

Dear everyone bitching about how the USDA subsidizes more than the cost of breakfast but not enough of the cost of lunch:

CONTACT YOUR FUCKING CONGRESSPERSON AND COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS STUPIDITY INSTEAD OF ATTACKING EACH OTHER HERE WITH THIS POINT AS IF IT MAKES AND SETTLES YOUR ENTIRE ARGUMENT.

No love,

AnonymousCoward.

AC: Physician, heal thyself.

Another handout. TPS claims this isn't costing them anything, but are they just factoring in food. Does the subsidy also cover TPS's food service wages, the extra money for utilities and security and staff to have the buildings open for breakfast, etc.

Why aren't the parents handling feeding their kids breakfast? As for the "needy" kids, the parents should be using their food stamps to provide the kdis breakfast.

And what is up with this unhealth food? If we are going to provide the kids breakfast provide things like oatmeal, whole grains, fresh fruit and juices. Not breakfast pizza and cinnamon rolls and other high carb/high calorie food. One more reason for me to vote no in November on their levy.

"The parents are irresponsible, so we'll take it out on the kids. Also, I'm pro-life."

"I worry so much about the children of the TPS school district that I'm willing to let the administration waste my money to feed them. But I have no problem with killing potential TPS students before they are given a chance at life outside the womb."

Did any of you folks ask to be born? It is one thing to crap on the parents - some are definitely deserving. However, none of these kids should have to go hungry in America - period. I've been following, reporting upon, praising and criticizing TPS for almost two decades.

If the USDA can't set reasonable rates and TPS can take advantage of the situation to benefit all children. Great but take your complaints to the USDA.

When kids have an empty belly they are not gonna learn. If we can decrease the negative impact on kids of being different only because they are poor, we should. The emphasis should be on learning. However, if this program is successful in creating improved student outcomes, there goes a big reason for all of you to vote no on the levy.

Some of the comments here are disgusting and show no empathy or compassion. Now go after me if you please but for those who are unfamiliar with me, I'm a major reason why TPS has not seen a new levy pass since 2000. But I'm doing it to reform education and help these kids and sometimes you have to smack the adults that say it is for the kids, but treat them with disdain.

BTW - anyone check out the nutrition in a breakfast pizza before they jumped to conclusion. You want to vote against a levy - I probably will and I'll be publishing a series of articles on various aspects of TPS operations - go ahead but this is not the reason to vote no unless you really hate poor kids!!

First let me say that I agree 100% with Foodie. Thank you for saying it better than I could! As someone who is sacrificing a lot to send my child to a Catholic high school, because that is my religion, I have recently heard comments from several parents who I found out are paying several hundred dollars less than I am (per month!), about how expensive it is, and how they wish they could get more Education Choice Money. Gee, so would I. I don't get a dime, never had, because I don't live near a qualifying school, though based on the way my neighborhood is delclining, it won't be long...It's BS. These parents have decent jobs, nice cars, really nice cell phones, and then get part of their kids' education paid for. As for Classy Lady's comment about the unhealthy food being served, while I have never seen nor eaten a NSLP (National School Lunch Program) meal, the USDA does have new guidelines this year regarding nutrition. For one, this year and the next half of all the grains offered, must be whole grain. In the year 20014-15, 100% of the grains offered must be whole grain. Ever have a whole grain/whole wheat pizza? It sucks. You think the kids are going to eat it? Nope. So the flour companies have come out with flours that are milled finer, making the end product more palatable. Guess what though, it's going to cost the schools $4-$5 more per 50# bag of flour. And this is just the USDA's ruling on grains. (You can find this on page 4,093 fo the USDA Federal Register; it's nice, light easy reading-ha).

Kids that won't eat pizza?

Look, they are KIDS.

If you start them off RIGHT, by NOT telling them that vegetables are icky and NOT setting bad examples for them and by NOT forcing a lot of icky food on them in the first place, they might actually like healthy food.

Unfortunately, most parents are NOT four-star chefs, and since Mommy and Daddy are busy busting their asses all day long just to be able to AFFORD food, they're too tired to cook properly when they get home. So you end up with Hamburger Helper or frozen dinners or take-out. Crap which brainwashes the tastebuds of the kids.

Of course, if you're getting assistance, food stamps DON'T cover the costs of HEALTHY food (I'm not even talking organic stuff here). Anyone bother to check food prices recently? How about the weather? That's right, DROUGHT = BIG JUMP IN FOOD PRICES. And it won't get better for several years because the farmers/ranchers are selling off their breeding stock because they have no grass left in pasture for them AND hay and other feed is scarce. So now you need to have good weather AND rebuilding of the herds for the next few years.

And the cheap crap will go up in price because the "fillers" cost more too. When the soybean crop is hit, it doesn't just affect the price of Tofurkey, it hits a lot of other things.

You want to vote against a levy - I probably will and I'll be publishing a series of articles on various aspects of TPS operations - go ahead but this is not the reason to vote no unless you really hate poor kids!!

ARRRGGHHH....dammit!

I appreciate your articles; however, this is not about feeding POOR kids. It's about freebies for everyone whether they are rich, poor, or in-between.

It is an abdication of responsibility on the part of the parents that can ABSOLUTELY afford it. It is a pure vote-buying gimmick that is as see-through as a glass window. "We make more money if we serve breakfast".

Address the USDA? Since when is having a right to do something the same thing as something is right to do? Is it right in country this deeply in debt that a local school is looking to make money of a federal agency? Is it ethical? Is it "right" that parent(s) who earn well-well above poverty wages per year be allowed to abdicate feeding their children to the school? They can't even dig up a few bucks per week (or god forbid, pack a fucking lunch)...so now EVERYBODY gets it...it will be their "right" to demand it from the schools??? This is not right. Free or reduced price lunches (30 or 40 cents per lunch--that would be $2 or less for weekly meals) are already available for those who NEED it.

I can't get over the amount of people who are slamming or misdirecting the argument to USDA or some sort of "hatred" (the last bastion of people who have no argument--we'll just say you "hate" those people and that will be the end of it) of poor people. I'm frustrated at poor parent(s) choices at times, but I don't want their kids to starve. I don't want anybody to starve. But between the food banks, emergency pantries (churches), general welfare, Section 8, food stamps....and now, free breakfast and lunch at school......I mean, holy shit, at what point do you say "how much more can we do if you won't do ANYTHING for yourself?" Damn right I blame some of the parents--if you cannot take responsibility to feed your child (through whatever means, I would think this would be PRIORITY NUMBER 1 for any parent--even above finding shelter), then you are a shitty parent. Not struggling. Not poor. Shitty. You're doing it wrong. Is that harsh? Maybe we need more harshness in society. Every mistake is not forgivable and not feeding YOUR kid in the presence of every helping hand available out there from government, church, and private sources is unacceptable. Find your kid a new guardian if you can't get your shit together. There are state agencies for that too. "Oh, what a terrible suggestion, OHT....you are so heartless!" What is more heartless--sending your kid to school hungry because you can't get up off your ass and go to the pantry/food bank/use the food stamp card and pack a sandwich or loving your child enough to realize you can't do it and get them somewhere they can have a greater chance of life. Yeah, I'm a heartless bastard. Given that 2 of my cousins were adopted as pre-teens, I must be out of my fucking mind to think that works. BTW, they still keep in close touch with their birth mother. And they are doing great. She's still so-so, but can take care of herself well enough from what I hear.

Also, there are plenty of rich people who have had kids starving and living under staircases. Shitty, despicable parents. This isn't a class thing. It's a shitty parent thing.

I cannot speak for other posters, but once again: I resent being told I "hate" poor people or want their kids to starve because I'm highly opposed to providing free meals for every kid when it is not necessary. Where it is necessary (and that is NOT NOT NOT 70% or 100% of the TPS population), keep the current program. It's doing fine.

As for the school menu, it doesn't look so bad to me.

Here's the menu for Bowsher High School, Labor Day week:

TUESDAY
September 04, 2012
LUNCH
Ham & Cheese Wraps on Flour Tortillas
Carrot Sticks w/Ranch Dressing
Orange Juice
1% Chocolate, 1% Strawberry, 1% Vanilla or 1% White Milk

WEDNESDAY
September 05, 2012
LUNCH
Breaded Chicken Nuggets
Whole Grain Bread Slice
Buttered Corn
Fresh Fruit or Fruit Cup
Orange Juice
1% Chocolate, 1% Strawberry, 1% Vanilla or 1% White Milk

THURSDAY
September 06, 2012
LUNCH
Salisbury Steak w/American Cheese on a Whole Grain Bun
Carrots & Celery w/Ranch
Fresh Fruit or Fruit Cup
Orange Juice
1% Chocolate, 1% Strawberry, 1% Vanilla or 1% White Milk

FRIDAY
September 07, 2012
LUNCH
Toasted Cheese on Whole Wheat Bread
Potato Rounds
Fresh Fruit or Fruit Cup
Orange Juice
1% Chocolate, 1% Strawberry, 1% Vanilla or 1% White Milk

Perfectly stated OHT.

I do not get especially worked up about programs that aid children for the reasons well stated by other posters. Children simply do not get a choice about the people who create them.

Oh hell lets really go all government and have the state raise all our kids, they want to tell everyone how to do it anyway.

And if the TeaOP gets their way, some people simply won't have a choice but to continue creating children.

IIZ, I have a friend who has a daughter @ CCHS. Her first 2 years he paid $200 per year. Last year he paid $1200 and regularly complained about it. I haven't had a chance to ask him yet what the bill was for this year. I know he's making more money than he did the past few years.

Can I get some free breakfast too?

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/06/27/baltimore-mayor-orioles-adam-jones-serve-free-meals-to-city-children/

Move to Baltimore and your kids will get 3 meals throughout the summer, too.

Washington Local Schools ran a similar program this past summer. There were no income requirements and if memory serves, no residency requirements as well. All you had to do was show up and be under the age of 18.

Funny how the Baltimore story doesn't mention how its paid for!!!

Here is what Lucas County has: http://www.feedlucaschildren.org/index.html

GTVT...it's Obama $$$ that pays for all these freebies!

Great program @ Washington Local...now they need to provide free bus passes or hail taxis, so Toledo's poor can eat free next summer.

Definition of Enabling: - enabling is used in the context of problematic behavior, to signify dysfunctional approaches that are intended to help but in fact may perpetuate a problem. A common theme of enabling is that third parties take responsibility, blame, or make accommodations for a person's harmful conduct (often with the best of intentions, or from fear or insecurity which inhibits action). The practical effect is that the person himself or herself does not have to do so, and is shielded from awareness of the harm it may do, and the need or pressure to change.

Key phrase – intended to help but only perpetuate the problem.

Nobody on this post is blaming the children. But to just continue to take responsibility for bad behavior only perpetuates the problem and if you have 10 million lost, unwanted souls now suffering in despair, expect that number to double and multiply generation after generation. That should supply a lot of Co-dependent people plenty of opportunity to scream from the rooftops how compassionate they are and let them feel needed. You have to place consequences and responsibility on people (parents in this case) for their actions. Not just write a check for their mistakes. No parent of a child receiving free meals and assistance should ever be lounging out on the streets, paying for tattoos, playing video games, collecting unemployment, on drugs… the list goes on. Yesterday I saw a woman on a cell phone pushing a 6 year old baby start screaming at the baby to “SHUT UP!!!, SHUT UP!!!” Disgusting! I’m tired of being forced to condone this with my pocketbook.

So there is no reason to spend money on poor kids - wait long enough and they won't need to eat.

I've spent my life investing money - both personally and professionally - and follow markets, tax law and policies, the FED (yuck) and all kinds of economic measurements. Started several businesses (and yes, there were many folks that helped me including the infrastructure built with our (my) tax dollars - where do you think the internet came from. Corporate welfare is the worst - it distorts rules and all but eliminates what the economists call market efficiency - the bible for conservatives. Lets start there because food programs are a drop in the bucket compared to the millions in tax benefits and subsidies carved out by the corporate lobbyist. First on my list are the large banks - break them up. Put sensible rules in place over the financial sector to stop passing risk to the taxpayer and assure they pay their fair share of taxes along with the rest of the financial sector. The best description I have for them are vultures and robber barons.

There was a time it made sense to tax capital and labor at different rates. Those conditions have not existed for over 20 years. Our problem today is too much capital chasing too few opportunities increasing supply at time of decreasing demand. Both sides of the equation need to match - so now it is time to level that playing field. Mitt you and your friends don't need more tax breaks!!

Ever wonder why they want to privatize social security? They could easily generate another $26 billion in fees. Social security as it is set up now - we can argue whether it should stay or remain, benefit cuts, etc. - is the most efficient and least costly fixed annuity ever available. But of course government can't do anything right.

And there are more examples I could trot out. This debate should be about tax and spending policies and what is the best mix going forward not about kids getting free breakfasts. I do understand the frustration - I always want to see effective use of my tax dollars but to think we can have safe food, air traffic controllers, interstate highways.... and not pay for them or do so on the cheap is just ludicrous.

For those of you that support social security, all I can say is "Socialist".

I'm done - gotta finish those articles. Hope everyone has a great weekend!

liz

I think it is admirable that you are sending your child to a high school of your choosing. I had grandchildren who graduated from Notre Dame and St. Francis as they were the schools their parents chose for them.

But I do have a question. Is that not a personal choice you are making about your son's school? Do you live where the public high school is rated deficient?

Just a wondering.

Jackie, if I were to send my child to a TPS high school, it would be Start. I don't belive it is rated deficient. However, that's neither here nor there. As you acknowledged, we chose our high school, and yes, in so doing, chose to accept financial responsibility. However, I do not think it is fair, that the taxes I pay, enable other parents to CHOOSE a high school as well, and pay SIGNIFICANTLY less than I do. We are not talking about a difference of a few hundred dollars, but thousands of dollars. If I have to pay for both my child and someone else's to attend the same private school, then I should be allowed some sort of tax break or EdChoice money too. What about all the other families that would like to CHOOSE their high school too? But because they cannot afford it, and the EdChoice dollars are not available to them, because they don't live on the "wrong" side of the tracks, they are forced to attend the school that they live near...And just why are the schools rated so low anyway? Is it the teachers? Or is it the kids?

liz

I just am not familiar with school choice and failing schools. Do not have them in our school district and I never paid any attention to what they were about. That's why I asked if the high school was deficient or whatever they call it.

Jackie - EdChoice is a program where students get taxpayer dollars to attend participating private/parochial schools. (They call them "state-funded scholarships.")

Students currently attending a public school in their resident district that has been rated in Academic Emergency or Academic Watch for two of the past three years are eligible to apply.

Info on EdChoice

mom2

Thanks for the information. I was truly ignorant or uninformed about this.