Oh, it is a big deal to me, in the sense of "this is an ongoing situation, that has sucked for decades, the requires attention - and never gets any." But I think the outcry over this specific situation is overblown and media-encouraged.
'Cause, see, I agree with you. I think we should lobby for more educational spending, and I think that that money should be applied to children's needs across the board, from books and facilities to nutritional requirements, for every student, regardless of background.
But, in the world we have right now, with a $300,000.000 deficit that was growing every day that the school provided hot lunches *not* to all children (one assumes there were kids who started with the baseline before the policy was enacted), but to children whose parents had indicated that the money would be coming from out-of-pocket rather than from the school's budgeted monies and then could not keep to that intention... what *should* the school have done?
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, *at all* - I honestly think they made the best of a crappy situation. Is there a better alternative? I suggested the sandwich-across-the-board option seriously - it's cheaper for all concerned, and it would make it possible to establish a level playing field while still maintaining some semblance of nutrition for students. All of the alternatives seem either impractical or - as with the starving option - a hell of a lot worse ....
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2009-02-28 12:31 am (UTC)'Cause, see, I agree with you. I think we should lobby for more educational spending, and I think that that money should be applied to children's needs across the board, from books and facilities to nutritional requirements, for every student, regardless of background.
But, in the world we have right now, with a $300,000.000 deficit that was growing every day that the school provided hot lunches *not* to all children (one assumes there were kids who started with the baseline before the policy was enacted), but to children whose parents had indicated that the money would be coming from out-of-pocket rather than from the school's budgeted monies and then could not keep to that intention... what *should* the school have done?
I'm not trying to be argumentative here, *at all* - I honestly think they made the best of a crappy situation. Is there a better alternative? I suggested the sandwich-across-the-board option seriously - it's cheaper for all concerned, and it would make it possible to establish a level playing field while still maintaining some semblance of nutrition for students. All of the alternatives seem either impractical or - as with the starving option - a hell of a lot worse ....