There's no free lunch; maybe not even a cheap one

Spending gods wrote:

Labor costs account for more than half of the school district's cafeteria budget,
I rest my case!

I agree! FYI the board is haVING A MEETING wED EVENING TO DISCUSS THE BUSSING SITUATION AND IT SEEMS THE MAIN CONCERN IS THE CUSTODIANS WILL HAVE THEIR RETIREMENT AFFECTED (SOURCE tHE tIMES nEWS 6/10/08). WHAT ABOUT ALL THE DISPLACED EMPLOYEES IN THE TOWNS / NATION? WHEN THEY LOST THEIR JOBS NOBODY CARED ABOUT THEIE RETIREMENT THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT LOSING THEIR JOBS JUST EXTRA MONEY. I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS BOARD AND THE PENNYWISE POUND FOOLISHNESS. CONSIDER THE TAXPAYERS, DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THEM FOR A CHANGE!!!!!!!

RE people in need who have kids; I feel very sorry for people who are truly in need. Especially with todays' economy, job layoffs, outsourcing, etc., it could be any one of us in need tomorrow. However - just an example, there's some people who live in my apartment building who are on food stamps, housing assistance, etc., and in some ways they seem to be doing better than I am! One woman told me she was buying lunch meat at the store which costs over $8 a pound for her kid; that's too costly for my budget! She's also using her food stamps at the local organic farmers market; I don't even shop there because the stuff they sell is so very expensive (and it's not just healthy veggies, etc., for her kid, there's all kinds of "snack" food, etc). And whenever I see her and her buddies, they're sitting outside the apartment building all day, drinking lots of sodas and beer, smoking one cigarette after another, etc. My tax dollars are paying for that?

As for the school lunches, I realize that even at $1.55, the lunch is a fairly good bargain. But why can't parents pack lunches for their kids anymore? And, no, I don't mean those prepackaged "Lunchable" things, how about good ol' PBJ w/ an apple?

Pachacutec wrote:

RE people in need who have kids; I feel very sorry for people who are truly in need. Especially with todays' economy, job layoffs, outsourcing, etc., it could be any one of us in need tomorrow. However - just an example, there's some people who live in my apartment building who are on food stamps, housing assistance, etc., and in some ways they seem to be doing better than I am! One woman told me she was buying lunch meat at the store which costs over $8 a pound for her kid; that's too costly for my budget! She's also using her food stamps at the local organic farmers market; I don't even shop there because the stuff they sell is so very expensive (and it's not just healthy veggies, etc., for her kid, there's all kinds of "snack" food, etc). And whenever I see her and her buddies, they're sitting outside the apartment building all day, drinking lots of sodas and beer, smoking one cigarette after another, etc. My tax dollars are paying for that?
As for the school lunches, I realize that even at $1.55, the lunch is a fairly good bargain. But why can't parents pack lunches for their kids anymore? And, no, I don't mean those prepackaged "Lunchable" things, how about good ol' PBJ w/ an apple?

I would report those people to the welfare office. They are supposed to be out looking for a job to get off assistance not soaking up the sun enjoying everybody else's money!

Becki wrote:

<quoted text>
I would report those people to the welfare office. They are supposed to be out looking for a job to get off assistance not soaking up the sun enjoying everybody else's money!

When I was a hiring manager, I would have these folks come in with the form they need to produce showing they are looking for a job, walk up to me and just ask me to sign it. They didn't ask for a job or interview, they just wanted the block checked so they could stay on public assistance. No,I did not sign and yes, I reported it. I am sure nothing happened to them though.

Joe Somebody wrote:

To Jacqueline: Liberalism is a mental disorder. Seek help immediately.

Insatiable greed and lack of regard for the needs of others as long as you get yours by ensuring others don't, is sociopathy (typical trait among upper-middle class snots who confuse starting out on 3rd base with hitting a triple). Seek help immediately. On the other hand...sociopathy is not treatable.

Sound Reasoning wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow, you sound just like a Bush Republican.
Please explain in detail, why if families had to be paying OVER $10/gal for gas right now, they would be better off?
What you so conveniently like to forget, is that NAFTA also brings us cheap oil from Canada. Do you even realize that the foreign country from which we import the MOST oil, is not anywhere in the Middle East, but from Canada? NAFTA requires Canada to sell us all that oil, and at prices far, far below today's barrel prices. If it wasn't for all the cheap oil thru NAFTA, gas prices would already be over $10, and that, my friend, is NOT good for families already struggling.

Wrong. Thanks to NAFTA, many working poor (who need food stamps just to survive) have little to no chance of climbing out of poverty into the middle class because the ranks at the bottom have been swelled by downwardly mobile middle class folks in fierce competition with the poor for the "survival" jobs.

The good jobs that were off-shored or sent south to the (un)happy maquiladora zone were not immediately replaced, and the net replacement was less than the number lost. Furthermore, the replacement jobs were service economy jobs - many which pay low wages. The good ones excluded the downsized middle-aged folks, women, and those with disabilities who were thrown off of SSI (unemployment rate for the disabled is 96%). The ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act) should really be called "The Americans Who Have Been Discarded Act".

The working poor cannot afford gas at the current prices of nealry $5/gal, so who's the dimwit here?

The oil/gas prices are largely the result of a ruling class's monopoly on oil and gas, in tandem with commodities brokers' speculation and laws that allow these oil oligarchs to tax us for fuel while NOT paying taxes on their record profits.

Third, during the 1970's oil embargo, we had the perfect opportunity to get serious about affordable alternative fuels and energy (not corn-based ethanol!. Big Oil in conjunction with auto makers kept that from happening. Sure, we've got solar and geothermal technology, but only those who have lots of money can afford it. Most working class people can't even afford to buy a home, let alone buy a home with a $20-$30K added pricetag for off-the-grid energy and home heating fuel.

LookingToEscape wrote:

<quoted text>
Sounds like the agenda of the global warming crowd.
--
1) Start first with making energy very, very expensive.
2) Then make food very, very expensive. Eliminate as much variety as possible and then replace everything with tofu.

That was my whole point, the energy and fuel prices are out of hand and it IS by design by the super rich - those whom so many in the upper-middle class worship blindly by sticking it to the poor politically as well as every other way imaginable. Unfortunately sarcasm seems to be lost on those readers here who claim to be of such superior intellect.