If this didn't specifically reference Carney I'd have assumed that it was coming from some MAGAt in a Red state.
So, the conservatives are losing their minds about feeding children in school. Where to even begin...?
The post I added below has to be one of the cruelest and most ignorant takes.
First of all, low income families with dependents pay little to no tax. This "tax break" would have 0 impact on them. But it would benefit wealthier families.
Second, some children have parents who have too much going on to provide a packed lunch every day. Maybe a single parent is working two jobs just to keep a roof over their heads and is exhausted all the time. This program would serve to reduce their stress by taking one important thing off their plate, and that coud make a big difference to the family. Other children have parents who are suffering from substance abuse issues, mental illness, chronic physical illness or disability, or other factors that get in the way of providing regular nutritious meals. Getting fed at school could be a huge incentive for these kids to keep going to school and keep on learning, which will benefit them (and their communities) for the rest of their lives.
Third, school lunches remove the stigma kids can face at school when some children bring great lunches and some bring something not great, or nothing at all.
Kids from poor families already face a lot of social stigma. Their clothes aren't as nice (often old or second hand), they have less (or no) spending money, they can't afford school field trips, they can't afford to participate in most sports their peers are involved in, or pay for things like renting an instrument for school band, etc, etc... It's a lot and it can be very stressful for them. Academic outcomes can be affected if school is a hostile place. I have seen some people suggest that the school lunches only go to children living at or below the poverty line. That's really just another way of shining a spotlight on them and announcing that they are different from the other children.
Finally, parents of any income group can benefit from having the lunch thing taken off their plate. It is a big thing. What if you run out of lunch stuff and have no time to go shopping before the next school day? What if you have an extra busy day and have no time to make lunches? What if the parent who usually makes the lunches is ill? There are so many ways parents who are not poor can enjoy the benefits of this. Wealthy parents know this. This is why private schools have lunch programs. I can't see what the fuss is about, unless it's just that conservatives have to hate every single thing a Liberal government does.
Imagine arguing against feeding hungry children. Seriously? How cruel partisanship makes some people!
SOURCE
www.merriam-webster.com
