Democrats want to give school kids 3 meals a day YEAR ROUND!!!

[Asclepias]

If you don't want them to get an abortion, you had better offer them a better solution
Not my problem" is not a better solution

Why do the rest of us have to solve the problems of these idiot preggies. Don't get pregnant.

When and if you become part of the human species everything will become clear to you. This is not the monkey troop you are accustomed to.

 

[Asclepias]

Since, when have all people become equal and treated equal. What part of the US do you live? Total nonsense!
Leave your value statements to yourself and go to school.

We won't have equal treatment until affirmative action ends.

Glad to see you admit white people have had AA for 400 plus years.

 

[Camp]

What kind of ideology would be against the practicality of feeding school children three meals per day? Certainly not conservatives who have traditionally included pragmatism in their ideology. Most of the folks claiming to be conservatives today will not even know what pragmatism means. For them, we might need to define it. It means being practical and following courses of action that are practical. Getting a maximum return on an investment is practical.
Endless studies and research have proven beyond any doubt that children who are well fed with nutritious foods are far more receptible to learning than those who are poorly nourished or worse, hungry. The government and tax payers invest large amounts of funding to educate children. Making sure the ability of these children to advance and prosper due to this investment is maximized makes good business and investment sense.
The practice of feeding school children does not have to be viewed as good or bad, it needs to be viewed as smart or to not do so, a foolish waste of an investment.

 

[Asclepias]

What kind of ideology would be against the practicality of feeding school children three meals per day? Certainly not conservatives who have traditionally included pragmatism in their ideology. Most of the folks claiming to be conservatives today will not even know what pragmatism means. For them, we might need to define it. It means being practical and following courses of action that are practical. Getting a maximum return on an investment is practical.
Endless studies and research have proven beyond any doubt that children who are well fed with nutritious foods are far more receptible to learning than those who are poorly nourished or worse, hungry. The government and tax payers invest large amounts of funding to educate children. Making sure the ability of these children to advance and prosper due to this investment is maximized makes good business and investment sense.

Not to cons. They just know their leaders tell them poor people want to be poor.......well everyone except themselves.

 

[thereisnospoon]

What did your dad make? About a buck an hour?

If he worked for the Big 3, remember you guys crying during the Bush years about how those guys were all making too much? Remember you guys cried about their "cadillac" insurance plans?

And now you will try to say this is why the Big 3 went bankrupt or why they moved overseas. Why would you say such things? Because you are jealous, ignorant and a fool. But now you will mock and ask if they made a buck an hour? You would truly refer to those days as the good old days.

Anyways, I laugh at Americans like you because instead of arguing for you to get the same pay as those union workers, you went along with the GOP on lowering their pay. And now you cry because wages are down.

I can't even wrap my brain around what a hypocrite you guys are. The stupidity is immeasurable.

Just remember that in 1999 the Big 3 had record profits and paid out record profit sharing to their workers. So don't try to blame unions for the Big 3 going bankrupt. When you send all those jobs overseas and you raise gas to over $4 a gallon like Bush did, you see corporations will start hurting. But I think they did it to break the unions. To get the employees to take cuts.

So now those auto workers are almost as broke as you. Are you happy now loser?

Wow....You are really uninformed. Despite the number of US maker plants that have closed over the last 4 decades, a number equal to or even greater than number of foreign auto makers have built plants here in the US employing hundreds of thousands of American workers at very high wages. The only difference? No unions needed. In fact the employees want nothing to do with Paully, Joey, Mikey and Guido's mobbed up organizations. Just last year thr UAW tried to organize the VW plant in Chattanooga, TN....The union lost. The union then said "well, we got cheated. We're suing". They lost that too....
BTW, the wages plus those Cadillac health plants cost GM for example, $70 per hour per worker. There is no way that in this highly competitive auto marketplace, that is sustainable.
GM is paying over ONE MILLION pensioners....That is one million people not working but being paid wages and medical benefits.
Oh and while we're on the subject of record corporate profits....Oh well, no need to explain. You are well aware the hypocrisy I am about to point out...
Lastly. What makes you believe that taxation forces business to invest in anything but paying taxes?

Since 2001, the country has lost 42,400 factories, including 36 percent of factories that employ more than 1,000 workers (which declined from 1,479 to 947), and 38 percent of factories that employ between 500 and 999 employees (from 3,198 to 1,972). An additional 90,000 manufacturing companies are now at risk of going out of business.


Long before the banking collapse of 2008, such important U.S. industries as machine tools, consumer electronics, auto parts, appliances, furniture, telecommunications equipment, and many others that had once dominated the global marketplace suffered their own economic collapse. Manufacturing employment dropped to 11.7 million in October 2009, a loss of 5.5 million or 32 percent of all manufacturing jobs since October 2000. The last time fewer than 12 million people worked in the manufacturing sector was in 1941. In October 2009, more people were officially unemployed (15.7 million) than were working in manufacturing.



But American companies have difficulty competing against foreign countries that undervalue their currencies, pay health care for their workers; provide subsidies for energy, land, buildings, and equipment; grant tax holidays and rebates and provide zero-interest financing; pay their workers poverty wages that would be illegal in the United States, and don't enforce safety or environmental regulations.

Proponents of free trade and outsourcing argue that the United States remains the largest manufacturing economy in the world. Yet, total manufacturing gross domestic product in 2008 (at $1.64 trillion) represented 11.5 percent of U.S. economic output, down from 17 percent in 1999, and 28 percent in 1959. As for our balance of trade, U.S. imports of goods totaled $2.52 trillion in 2008, while exports came to $1.29 trillion -- creating a goods deficit of $821 billion. Those imported goods represented 17.6 percent of U.S. GDP. The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services in 2008 stood at $700 billion -- or more than $2,000 for every American.

Damn that Guido and Mikey!



The Plight of American Manufacturing

And the ceo's that cut the most jobs got the biggest bonus'. Yes, tax them more.

Do you know what the tax rate is on a "bonus check"?

It's considered "Luxury Tax".
The government gets 1/3 of it

Actually 39.2% Plus state income tax plus, all other taxes.
The typical bonus payout is reduced by 50%...And to these whiny libs, it is never enough

 

[thereisnospoon]

Will those that opt out get a tax refund?

No. Why should they?

Why not? Why should THEY pay? They aren't getting any benefit?....

For the same reason that people that dont drive cars pay for you to have nice roads to drive on.

People who drive cars pay for a lot of it in the form of gasoline (useage) taxes.

There is no comparison.

YET no gas tax in the nation, be it federal or state brings in enough for the roads, most are funded about 50%-60% by those taxes, the rest from general funds, unless it's changed in the past five years, there has NEVER been a road that was self financing off of road taxes in the US (usage-GAS-fees)

Sure it does. The problem is not the level of the taxation. The problem is what happens to the money once the politicians get their hands on it.
You people say nothing about how the money is spent. The only thing you see is "it isn't enough. so raise taxes".....That's illogical.
That's like telling a glutenous person he will be given more food as long as he will go on a diet.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Schools should be open 6 to 6, six days a week, all meals provided so you can keep an eye on them, help them learn to teach themselves, and run their fat little asses off. The parents have work to do. If you actually cared about children you'd pay up for that, but you don't, and never will...

"Pay up"?......Why?
You're right about one thing...It will NEVER happen.....There is no money to pay for it..
The sheer logistics of releasing then busing kids home at the height of rush hour is impossible.

They always seem to find all the funds necessary to fight two wars.

Meanwhile Donald Trump alone is sitting on $8 billion dollars. That's not including buffet koch Soros and Rupert Murdock.

I'm watching shark tank right now. 5 billionaires on the show. There are so many millionaires and billionaires in America. There are so many billion dollar companies in America. Please stop asking where we're going to get the money.

Nope. There are 492 billionaires for 318,000,000 people. Roughly 1 billionaire for every 600,000,000!

Yet 50,000 families worth $100,000,000+

And?

 

[Camp]

What kind of ideology would be against the practicality of feeding school children three meals per day? Certainly not conservatives who have traditionally included pragmatism in their ideology. Most of the folks claiming to be conservatives today will not even know what pragmatism means. For them, we might need to define it. It means being practical and following courses of action that are practical. Getting a maximum return on an investment is practical.
Endless studies and research have proven beyond any doubt that children who are well fed with nutritious foods are far more receptible to learning than those who are poorly nourished or worse, hungry. The government and tax payers invest large amounts of funding to educate children. Making sure the ability of these children to advance and prosper due to this investment is maximized makes good business and investment sense.

Not to cons. They just know their leaders tell them poor people want to be poor.......well everyone except themselves.

Most people who call themselves conservatives on these pages to not adhere to conservative ideology or even any ideology at all. They are simply knee jerk reactionaries. Look at how many are cheering for and following Trump, a long standing liberal who is in fact pushing for many liberal agenda's. Not wanting to feed kids in school is just a mean spirited thing and probably caused in part by a false belief that it would benefit mostly minority kids. Look at the OP if there is any doubt.

 

[thereisnospoon]

If he worked for the Big 3, remember you guys crying during the Bush years about how those guys were all making too much? Remember you guys cried about their "cadillac" insurance plans?

And now you will try to say this is why the Big 3 went bankrupt or why they moved overseas. Why would you say such things? Because you are jealous, ignorant and a fool. But now you will mock and ask if they made a buck an hour? You would truly refer to those days as the good old days.

Anyways, I laugh at Americans like you because instead of arguing for you to get the same pay as those union workers, you went along with the GOP on lowering their pay. And now you cry because wages are down.

I can't even wrap my brain around what a hypocrite you guys are. The stupidity is immeasurable.

Just remember that in 1999 the Big 3 had record profits and paid out record profit sharing to their workers. So don't try to blame unions for the Big 3 going bankrupt. When you send all those jobs overseas and you raise gas to over $4 a gallon like Bush did, you see corporations will start hurting. But I think they did it to break the unions. To get the employees to take cuts.

So now those auto workers are almost as broke as you. Are you happy now loser?

Wow....You are really uninformed. Despite the number of US maker plants that have closed over the last 4 decades, a number equal to or even greater than number of foreign auto makers have built plants here in the US employing hundreds of thousands of American workers at very high wages. The only difference? No unions needed. In fact the employees want nothing to do with Paully, Joey, Mikey and Guido's mobbed up organizations. Just last year thr UAW tried to organize the VW plant in Chattanooga, TN....The union lost. The union then said "well, we got cheated. We're suing". They lost that too....
BTW, the wages plus those Cadillac health plants cost GM for example, $70 per hour per worker. There is no way that in this highly competitive auto marketplace, that is sustainable.
GM is paying over ONE MILLION pensioners....That is one million people not working but being paid wages and medical benefits.
Oh and while we're on the subject of record corporate profits....Oh well, no need to explain. You are well aware the hypocrisy I am about to point out...
Lastly. What makes you believe that taxation forces business to invest in anything but paying taxes?

Since 2001, the country has lost 42,400 factories, including 36 percent of factories that employ more than 1,000 workers (which declined from 1,479 to 947), and 38 percent of factories that employ between 500 and 999 employees (from 3,198 to 1,972). An additional 90,000 manufacturing companies are now at risk of going out of business.


Long before the banking collapse of 2008, such important U.S. industries as machine tools, consumer electronics, auto parts, appliances, furniture, telecommunications equipment, and many others that had once dominated the global marketplace suffered their own economic collapse. Manufacturing employment dropped to 11.7 million in October 2009, a loss of 5.5 million or 32 percent of all manufacturing jobs since October 2000. The last time fewer than 12 million people worked in the manufacturing sector was in 1941. In October 2009, more people were officially unemployed (15.7 million) than were working in manufacturing.



But American companies have difficulty competing against foreign countries that undervalue their currencies, pay health care for their workers; provide subsidies for energy, land, buildings, and equipment; grant tax holidays and rebates and provide zero-interest financing; pay their workers poverty wages that would be illegal in the United States, and don't enforce safety or environmental regulations.

Proponents of free trade and outsourcing argue that the United States remains the largest manufacturing economy in the world. Yet, total manufacturing gross domestic product in 2008 (at $1.64 trillion) represented 11.5 percent of U.S. economic output, down from 17 percent in 1999, and 28 percent in 1959. As for our balance of trade, U.S. imports of goods totaled $2.52 trillion in 2008, while exports came to $1.29 trillion -- creating a goods deficit of $821 billion. Those imported goods represented 17.6 percent of U.S. GDP. The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services in 2008 stood at $700 billion -- or more than $2,000 for every American.

Damn that Guido and Mikey!



The Plight of American Manufacturing

And the ceo's that cut the most jobs got the biggest bonus'. Yes, tax them more.

Do you know what the tax rate is on a "bonus check"?

It's considered "Luxury Tax".
The government gets 1/3 of it

Weird, MOST CEO's top exec's get stock options, taxed at Cap gains rate, 20% today



EFFECTIVE RATES

So?....
Contrary to your side's beliefs, the purpose of taxation is to raise revenue for essential government functions. Not as a means to punish those who make you feel uncomfortable.
The proof in the pudding is this. When Obama was considering an executive order which woudl treat capital gains as ordinary income thus subjecting it to the top marginal rate of 39.2%, he was reminded that since the rate was lowered to its present level, revenues from capital gains receipts increased dramatically. Obama said that the current capital gains rate was inappropriate.
With these people, it is not what it does. What matters is how it looks.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Wow....You are really uninformed. Despite the number of US maker plants that have closed over the last 4 decades, a number equal to or even greater than number of foreign auto makers have built plants here in the US employing hundreds of thousands of American workers at very high wages. The only difference? No unions needed. In fact the employees want nothing to do with Paully, Joey, Mikey and Guido's mobbed up organizations. Just last year thr UAW tried to organize the VW plant in Chattanooga, TN....The union lost. The union then said "well, we got cheated. We're suing". They lost that too....
BTW, the wages plus those Cadillac health plants cost GM for example, $70 per hour per worker. There is no way that in this highly competitive auto marketplace, that is sustainable.
GM is paying over ONE MILLION pensioners....That is one million people not working but being paid wages and medical benefits.
Oh and while we're on the subject of record corporate profits....Oh well, no need to explain. You are well aware the hypocrisy I am about to point out...
Lastly. What makes you believe that taxation forces business to invest in anything but paying taxes?

Since 2001, the country has lost 42,400 factories, including 36 percent of factories that employ more than 1,000 workers (which declined from 1,479 to 947), and 38 percent of factories that employ between 500 and 999 employees (from 3,198 to 1,972). An additional 90,000 manufacturing companies are now at risk of going out of business.


Long before the banking collapse of 2008, such important U.S. industries as machine tools, consumer electronics, auto parts, appliances, furniture, telecommunications equipment, and many others that had once dominated the global marketplace suffered their own economic collapse. Manufacturing employment dropped to 11.7 million in October 2009, a loss of 5.5 million or 32 percent of all manufacturing jobs since October 2000. The last time fewer than 12 million people worked in the manufacturing sector was in 1941. In October 2009, more people were officially unemployed (15.7 million) than were working in manufacturing.



But American companies have difficulty competing against foreign countries that undervalue their currencies, pay health care for their workers; provide subsidies for energy, land, buildings, and equipment; grant tax holidays and rebates and provide zero-interest financing; pay their workers poverty wages that would be illegal in the United States, and don't enforce safety or environmental regulations.

Proponents of free trade and outsourcing argue that the United States remains the largest manufacturing economy in the world. Yet, total manufacturing gross domestic product in 2008 (at $1.64 trillion) represented 11.5 percent of U.S. economic output, down from 17 percent in 1999, and 28 percent in 1959. As for our balance of trade, U.S. imports of goods totaled $2.52 trillion in 2008, while exports came to $1.29 trillion -- creating a goods deficit of $821 billion. Those imported goods represented 17.6 percent of U.S. GDP. The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services in 2008 stood at $700 billion -- or more than $2,000 for every American.

Damn that Guido and Mikey!



The Plight of American Manufacturing

And the ceo's that cut the most jobs got the biggest bonus'. Yes, tax them more.

Do you know what the tax rate is on a "bonus check"?

It's considered "Luxury Tax".
The government gets 1/3 of it

Weird, MOST CEO's top exec's get stock options, taxed at Cap gains rate, 20% today



EFFECTIVE RATES

My brother is a VP and he has so much money he doesn't know what to do with it. And he's just a VP. He doesn't make $1 million a year yet he is rich beyond any of these right wingers could dream of being and I swear it would bother poor Republican usmb members more than it would him.

Perhaps your brother is smart with his money. I will surmise he does not live beyond his means. He probably has most of his wealth tied up in investments so that he can enjoy his retirement with little concern for finances.
So what's your point?....Because your brother is doing the right thing with HIS money, that makes him evil? Or that he should be smashed with taxes to make YOU happy?
Or are you one these sniveling bed wetters that thinks "its just not fair for one person to have all that money".....?
Here's some cheese to go with your whine.

 

[thereisnospoon]

What kind of ideology would be against the practicality of feeding school children three meals per day? Certainly not conservatives who have traditionally included pragmatism in their ideology. Most of the folks claiming to be conservatives today will not even know what pragmatism means. For them, we might need to define it. It means being practical and following courses of action that are practical. Getting a maximum return on an investment is practical.
Endless studies and research have proven beyond any doubt that children who are well fed with nutritious foods are far more receptible to learning than those who are poorly nourished or worse, hungry. The government and tax payers invest large amounts of funding to educate children. Making sure the ability of these children to advance and prosper due to this investment is maximized makes good business and investment sense.
The practice of feeding school children does not have to be viewed as good or bad, it needs to be viewed as smart or to not do so, a foolish waste of an investment.

Ok..Here's a homework assignment for you...Since you used the term "practicality", devise a plan to not only provide food for every kid across the country three squares a day, the facilities to prepare the food, the workers ( who must be paid) to serve the food, the equipment, the space, and all of the other ancillary items that would go into making this work. Then provide a cost analysis for same. Knock yourself out.
You libs see a way to increase dependency on government and you become bulls in a China sop trying to get it done. You eschew any notion of unintended consequences, any fiscal fallout. And how this will effect the people involved.
So go ahead. Explain how this will work.
This ought to be good.
BTW, why are you not forking over some of YOUR money to your local schools to get this off the ground? Why does this have to involve a money grab?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

A tax reduction is not a subsidy.

Stop lying, Leftists!

A tax reduction is not a subsidy.

Stop lying, Leftists!

Tax subsidies are real. They recognized by the IRS, business, the courts, tax attorneys, accountants, etc. You are promoting a faux debate and should be more careful about calling people liars when discussing things you are not knowledgeable about.

www.earthtrack.net/depth-tax-subsidies

Tax subsidies are real, but tax write offs are not subsidies.

Stop lying, Leftists!

You are the one that is lying. The first time you made the claim was a mistake. Now you have been give an academic and objective link that explains why a tax write off or loophole is legally and academically recognized as a subsidy. Still, with nothing to back you up other than your stubborn opinion, you insist on holding on to your misguided opinion as a fact when it is anything but a fact.
If you read the link you would become educated on the topic, realize how wrong you are and move on. Instead you will stay stupid and ignorantly call those who are more knowledgeable than you liars. Typical, classical dopey jerk. The very definition of low information poorly educated nit wit.

Diptwat, I also provided a link from the actual dictionary that is wholly lacking in your made up Leftist political definition.

Stop lying, Leftists!

 

[rightwinger]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

He said hungry not starving

 

[thereisnospoon]

What kind of ideology would be against the practicality of feeding school children three meals per day? Certainly not conservatives who have traditionally included pragmatism in their ideology. Most of the folks claiming to be conservatives today will not even know what pragmatism means. For them, we might need to define it. It means being practical and following courses of action that are practical. Getting a maximum return on an investment is practical.
Endless studies and research have proven beyond any doubt that children who are well fed with nutritious foods are far more receptible to learning than those who are poorly nourished or worse, hungry. The government and tax payers invest large amounts of funding to educate children. Making sure the ability of these children to advance and prosper due to this investment is maximized makes good business and investment sense.

Not to cons. They just know their leaders tell them poor people want to be poor.......well everyone except themselves.

Most people who call themselves conservatives on these pages to not adhere to conservative ideology or even any ideology at all. They are simply knee jerk reactionaries. Look at how many are cheering for and following Trump, a long standing liberal who is in fact pushing for many liberal agenda's. Not wanting to feed kids in school is just a mean spirited thing and probably caused in part by a false belief that it would benefit mostly minority kids. Look at the OP if there is any doubt.

Oh yes...Not wanting to spend ( waste) tons of money on something that has the look of a logistical and fiscal nightmare written all over it is ( here comes the lib narrative) "mean spirited"....Yeah, ok. Whatever.
Hey, if a local school district wants to petition its taxpayers to set up such a program, let them. That's how its supposed to work. Members of a community taking care of the members of the community.
But no...You people want to create another gigantic federal bureaucracy. Hire tens of thousands of new federal workers to administer this new program. You want a new tax to be collected and redistributed to the places the federal government sees fit so you can bitch and whine about how many blue states don't get back every dollar they send to Washington.....Oy vey....
Look, this is not happening. Forget it. Move on.
I have one last thought on this....If you want free meals for every student why don't you enlist the help of your wealthy lib friends in Hollywood or Washington DC? Or people like Theresa Heinz, Bill Gates or George Soros? How come you're not knocking on the doors of Camelot( Kennedy compound)?
Ya know what would happen? They'd all tell you to go pound sand.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

He said hungry not starving

The difference is?
Do try to stay on point. Getting into semantics to strengthen your argument is never successful.

 

[thereisnospoon]

T

Why is it always Republicans who come up with this stuff?

This conversation reminds me of a daily show episode where one week they showed fox news making the argument that minimum wage was fine and then the next week they were making the argument that $500k a year isn't really that much.

I forget exactly how it went but it pointed out how Republican defenders are such double talkers that you know they are fos.

The daily show? Now there's a great source of information....

 

[Camp]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

Child obesity does not indicate the absence of starvation. Marasmus starvation is the visible type of starvation. It is caused by the lack of calories of any type and creates the super skinny visions that we are used to seeing in starvation cases. Kwashiortyor starvation is the lack of nutrients that cause organ breakdowns and a slower less identifiable starvation. Both are fatal.

 

[Asclepias]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

Your hyperbole is noted. No one said starving.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Could be. I am a reading/language arts teacher....not math, lol.

Which means you're a welfare bum yourself since you're paid for a job that has no social value.. We should only teach STEM in school. THINK

Language Arts.....We used to call it English Grammar and Composition.