Way to go Wyoming Valley West (Pa.) School District!

That thread title is sarcasm: Parents told they could lose kids over unpaid school lunches


What. The. FUCK?

Real fucking winner of a human being, eh.

All this over an amount less than what Jeff Bezos makes before lunch every day. Our wealth distribution is fucked up like that lawyer’s priorities & ethics are fucked up.

What the ever-loving fuck have we done to our country?

The biggest crime in the country today is to be poor. To paraphrase one of this board’s posters, “Why should I have to pay more taxes so that somebody who sits around smoking weed all day gets free health care?” Money = character to too many.

I hope you ain’t insinuating shit like this is something new. The US has always been a fucked-up chudfest, ever since the bourgeois temper-tantrum that led to its founding.

That late? I’d imagine he makes more than that in the time it takes just squeezing toothpaste onto his toothbrush. Or whoever (or whatever) it is that does it for him. :wink:

I can’t tell what your point is relative to this particular incident. Are you saying it’s the delinquent parents who are poor, or the delinquent parents who have a “Why should I have to pay?” attitude?

Why isn’t school lunch all lumped into tuition or the whole cost to begin with? Is it so parents who want to feed their kids home-packed lunches don’t have to double-pay?

This is a public school district—what tuition?

When I was in school, kids had the option of buying lunch there or bringing a lunch from home.

According to Money magazine, Bezos makes something like $3,182 per second, so in less than 10 seconds he’s made enough to cover the debt. Not that this helps the school district or the delinquent parents, since I’m sure he has no knowledge of the issue nor is he likely to care if he did.

I understand the outrage about taking kids away for unpaid bills.

However, who do you all think is going to pay for lunches if the parents don’t? Money just falls from the skies? They’re $20K in the hole here. I guess they can just stop providing lunches.

And WTF does Jeff Bezos have to do with this discussion? Does he have kids in the district? Does he owe $450? Is he just supposed to pay for everyone’s lunch…because?

Let’s see what the school district might have done:

  1. Might have done some research to find out why parents aren’t paying. Is it because they are truly too poor, or is it because they are using poor judgment about spending money.

1a. If they are truly too poor, consider finding alternative methods of funding lunch.

1b. If the parents are making poor choices, consider ways to help them learn how to do better.

  1. Might have just said “to continue to get a lunch, by X date every kid must be paid up, or there must be a plan in place so that the kid is paid up by Y date. Otherwise, after X date no more lunches from the school.”

2a. This would result in kids going hungry, probably, but not all of the currently unpaid ones. How many outliers left? If it’s a manageable number, work out individual plans.

2b. If it’s not a manageable number, see 1a.

There are surely lots of ways the district might have gone about this. In any case, the district might have applied some thought to the problem, instead of setting up families for failure and then hitting them with a hammer for it.

Username/Post combo!

I’m a 57 year old white guy with zero kids and I don’t make a large amount of money, but I’m more than happy to pay sufficient taxes to feed all of the school children a decent meal. Hell, give them breakfast too while we’re at it.

Without trying to figure out and correct all of the possible reasons - or assigning blame - as to why they’re not being provided by the parents.

Let’s knock off all this judgmental hand-wringing about how bad the parents must be and just do the right thing here.

Fair point. We should save money by removing them from their families via a court case and putting them in long-term foster care.

You notice I said I was against removing kids? Apparently not.

So who are you expecting to pay for these lunches?

People who can afford it.

That is, all of us, as a group, with people who can afford more contributing more to the pool.

What are you talking about? There’s no tuition fee in public schools. Or do you mean that the taxes used to fund the school should be set to also cover lunch?

I saw you said that. So why do you keep asking this question like it’s relevant?

It’s not.

That said, I’ll answer it, because I know how this works:

  1. The school nutrition program may have majorly fallen down on the job of distributing free/reduced lunch applications. The combination of the massive debt they’ve built up and their outrageous “we’ll take your children if you’re too poor” attitude makes me think this is likely. They should be far more proactive in getting those apps out and ensuring that people know how to fill them out.
  2. Some parents still won’t fill out the form, or may not qualify but also won’t pay. They should reach out to these parents early. They may have done so.
  3. If parents don’t pay, referring them to a collections agency is a less-than-ideal approach, but doesn’t involve committing mail fraud.
  4. If they can’t collect, funds come out of the district’s operating budget.
  5. This is a really easy fundraising ask. Reach out to local houses of worship first.

It’s not like these fools are the first folks to encounter this problem. They’re just the first (AFAIK) to hit on this particularly egregious “solution.”

Let’s see - they could just provide the lunches to everyone for free and pay for it out of the budget , as some districts do. Or they could look into whether the district qualifies to serve lunches to everyone paid for by the USDA*. Or they could let the students with no money go hungry - which is still better than threatening foster care and taking up the time of child protective workers , who will not put the kids in foster care for an unpaid lunch bill anyway.

  • Because at some point, processing the applications in a low income district becomes more expensive than providing lunches to the few who don’t qualify for free lunch.

A lot of school districts around here have opened up the income-based free-lunch program to all students, regardless of need. Why did they do that? Because it turns out that it’s actually cheaper to do it that way. Most of the money going into the free-lunch program wasn’t actually going towards food; it was going towards bureaucracy to determine who was allowed to get food. Cut the bureaucracy, and you can feed everyone for less than you were spending to feed a small fraction.

Which doesn’t, of course, stop people from complaining about all that money “wasted” by giving it to everyone.

Maybe we could find ways to support school lunch programs. If parents are too stingy to pay for lunches, it’s probably more than just a philosophical objection to paying for a child’s lunch. Despite our economic growth, much of this country - including many of the people who can’t afford private school - remains economically distressed. Threatening to take children away because they’re in economic distress doesn’t feed children and it doesn’t remove the economic stressors that are apparently causing the problems in the first place.

Jeff Bezos has nothing to do with the school district, but his obscene wealth and those of the billionaire class are symbols of the gross class disparities that exist in this country. And maybe considering all the problems that Bezos has had with Trump, now might be a good time to consider why ordinary people voted against their own interests and put that bozo in office. For many people, voting for Trump was a middle finger to people like Jeff Bezos.

Like I said back in February 2016, voting for Trump was a big “fuck you” to a system that isn’t working for most Americans.