Quote:To me this is just wrong and is part of the problem with not only our government public education system, but with government in general.

 

A school lunch worker was fired for feeding a first grader because the child didn't have enough money for lunch.

 

This discussion can go so many ways, but off the top of my head a couple of issues come to mind.

 

First, what if we did away with the useless Department of Education and spent a portion of the savings on providing lunches for children?  Of course, ultimate responsibility for a child's welfare is on the parent(s) of the child.  However, I see no reason why a child should be denied a healthy meal because of the parents' incompetence.  Further money to pay for the program could be extracted from the parents' "tax refund".

 

Second, what if we got rid of the unions that siphon money from the school system and the teachers?  Perhaps teachers can earn at least just a little bit more than they earn now, along with the cafeteria workers, the janitors, etc.  Perhaps, hold the educators responsible for the success and/or failure of their students.  After all, these are all government jobs that are not driven by profit.  Why is a union necessary?  Exactly how much money flows to these unions and for what purpose?

 

There are many arguments and topics that can be discussed from this issue.

Teachers are being held accountable for the success/failure of their students now. Now look at what you first posted and see if that makes sense. The child you referenced for not being given money by parents, or a bagged lunch. Think about the home life. You think they are helping the student at home be a succesful student? Multiply this by...well, a whole lot.

 

Regarding the lunch lady, that's crazy she lost her job based on trying to help the kid out. (didn't read the article, so assuming that's all the case entailed).

---