11 ms·

Schools in England warn of crisis of ‘heartbreaking’ rise in hungry children

49 points by mardiyah 4y ago

throwamon 4y ago
Yes, it's so heartbreaking when it starts happening in first-world countries.
- tomrod 4y ago
  I can't tell if your comment is in good faith or is sarcastic. It's heartbreaking that children anywhere go hungry. Children didn't make the decisions that led them to their hunger. They didn't choose to be born in situations, regimes, or societies that failed them. They didn't choose and have no power over local culture, religions, politics, policies, wars, and other drivers of stupidity. They are victims, completely, of others who have power to make things better. So yes, it is heartbreaking that this continues to happen in first-world (US/NATO aligned) countries, second-world (formerly Soviet aligned countries), and third-world (unaligned) countries. People who complain about taxes going to feed children are social darwinists. We should pay teachers and lunch staff much better as well.
  - wiredearp 4y ago
    I think that super power affiliation is perhaps a somewhat outdated definition of the three worlds concept and Britain certainly doesn't fit the modern one [1]. This guy argues that Britain is best thought of as a fourth world country [2] and he explains why the financial markets now compare Britain to a banana republic [3] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World [2] https://eand.co/how-america-collapsed-and-became-a-fourth-world-country-db9829323a9a https://eand.co/how-america-collapsed-and-became-a-fourth-wo... [3] https://eand.co/britain-just-hit-the-next-level-of-self-destruction-and-the-pain-will-be-immense-ca254f87533c https://eand.co/britain-just-hit-the-next-level-of-self-dest...
    - tomrod 4y ago
      To keep the threadjack potential low, note that 4th world to Nth world countries' children should also not be starving.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  "starts"?
Gravityloss 4y ago
Can't think of a thing with a better benefit to cost ratio for a than providing school children a free meal. It's very cheap and it sucks very much if isn't done. This applies on society, government, municipality, village, family - so many levels.
- adabyron 4y ago
  Free school meals for all kids could simplify a lot of things. Obviously it could be paid for by an income based tax. Nation wide tax makes most sense to me. It's the cheapest & easy way to help these kids get nutrition. It benefits society more than the cost. It also prevents the need to waste money on lunch cards, payment systems & some poor lady having to manage & collect payments.
  - pessimizer 4y ago
    > Free school meals for all kids could simplify a lot of things. A universal benefit guarantees 100% utilization. If you put in bureaucracy and/or a token payment, people will fail to navigate it (and downstream bureaucracies with their own budgets can make it more difficult to navigate), so like magic the program becomes a lot cheaper (by leaving children hungry.)
    - BitwiseFool 4y ago
      >"A universal benefit guarantees 100% utilization" Not necessarily, I know a lot of progress has been made since I left school but back in my day there were some seriously low grade meals served at the cafeteria. It was not uncommon for other kids to bring lunchables and homemade meals to eat instead and we'd throw out the tray of food provided to us. I'm not anti-free school meals for all, however. I just wanted to add the caveat that the 100% utilization metric is not quite as it seems.
      - denton-scratch 4y ago
        My kids wouldn't eat the (paid-for) hot school meals. They both preferred the sandwiches I made for them.
PuppyTailWags 4y ago
Good faith-ly asking here: What, if any, are the political arguments against government-provided 3 square meals a day for kids provided by default? Breakfast, lunch, and a little pickup baggie to go home with. The kids who don't need it/don't want it can just opt out of the program, but the floor is everyone gets to eat. I'd gladly pay more taxes even though my children aren't at risk.
- adabyron 4y ago
  The little pickup baggie is a great idea schools should implement, especially children with long bus rides. Most kids are starving once they get home.
  - ljf 4y ago
    Over the summer holidays my office had free lunch bags for kids - your kids could come to the office, or you could take the bags with you. Any bags that weren't taken by 6.30pm were given away through Olio, so were with people who wanted them outside the business ASAP - they were collected by a local Olio rep, and with people how wanted them sometimes by 7pm. Pretty cheap for our company to run - helped out parents who needed it, was fun for the kids that got to come in and then zero waste as it all went out to other local families if we didn't use it all.
- nathan_compton 4y ago
  Kids should be able to eat for free. I believe the arguments against it are more or less: 1) I don't want to pay more taxes 2) Won't this make their parents less desperate and thus more able to choose their working conditions? 3) Will this encourage poor people to have too many kids? 4) I just don't like the idea of anyone getting anything without working for it.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
mtalantikite 4y ago
For those curious, the Black Panther Party was one of the major drivers to getting the free breakfast programs going in schools across the US. The FBI of course hated that, but what we have today is largely thanks to their organizing efforts. [1] And as others have commented, there seems to be little reason not to provide at least two meals a day to kids in schools. Besides "it's socialism" from those that seem to hate other humans in need. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Breakfast_for_Children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Breakfast_for_Children
- selimthegrim 4y ago
  They also got many black judges appointed at the state level in California.
- krapp 4y ago
  The fact of the matter is, if all American schoolchildren were white, school lunches wouldn't even be controversial.
  - sublinear 4y ago
    Any difference can give rise to discrimination. It would just move up to the next least expensive items such as books, transportation, etc. Would schools even need to exist if everyone was the same?
mensetmanusman 4y ago
So sad. Almost a million people in the UK living off less than £7k per year is surprising.
3qz 4y ago
In Canada we don’t feed kids at school. If a kid doesn’t bring lunch, it’s their parents fault. If that happens frequently it’s considered child abuse. Lots of elementary schools here (mine) don’t even have a cafeteria! I was surprised when I found out that we’re one of the few developed countries that doesnt have any kind of lunch program. I feel like our system works fine though and since I’ve seen the garbage that American children are fed I think it’s actually better this way
- socialismisok 4y ago
  Why is the best way not "provide a healthy meal (or two) in a centralized way"? Cafeterias can produce healthy meals efficiently and cheaply, compared to distributing that labor to every parent. And then you don't need to monitor kids for parents not providing meals, which eliminates a whole cost. And worst of all, no kids should have to not eat because their parents fucked up. It sets them so far behind. Every meal a kid misses is a failure on all of us.
- goalieca 4y ago
  >I feel like our system works fine though and since I’ve seen the garbage that American children are fed I think it’s actually better this way I'm canadian and i'm always tired of this smug "we're better than the americans" attitude. It's quite ignorant of the facts and lazy to addressing our problems.
- rvieira 4y ago
  > In Canada we don’t feed kids at school. If a kid doesn’t bring lunch, it’s their parents fault. If that happens frequently it’s considered child abuse Why is this system better than: Feed kids at school. If a school doesn't do it it's their fault. If it happens frequently the director is fired.
koolba 4y ago
The other social benefit for free school meals is that all the kids eat the same food together at the same table. Literally breaking bread together with no class separation. That pays dividends on all sides for years to come. It’s a real shame this isn’t a universal thing.
elsquid 4y ago
I have told my wife and maybe one other person about this in my life. The most trouble I was ever in during my childhood was for being caught stealing food from the school cafeteria. My parents were too proud to admit they needed help, and certainly not from the government, so I had none. The school didn't have any empathy either. I stole lunch (and as much as I could eat because it would probably be all I ate) every day for almost an entire school year before they caught me. They knew how much was missing over that period of time and put it all on me (no idea if I was the only one doing this). I hope they help these kids.

49 points by mardiyah 4y ago

throwamon 4y ago

Yes, it's so heartbreaking when it starts happening in first-world countries.

tomrod 4y ago
I can't tell if your comment is in good faith or is sarcastic. It's heartbreaking that children anywhere go hungry. Children didn't make the decisions that led them to their hunger. They didn't choose to be born in situations, regimes, or societies that failed them. They didn't choose and have no power over local culture, religions, politics, policies, wars, and other drivers of stupidity. They are victims, completely, of others who have power to make things better. So yes, it is heartbreaking that this continues to happen in first-world (US/NATO aligned) countries, second-world (formerly Soviet aligned countries), and third-world (unaligned) countries. People who complain about taxes going to feed children are social darwinists. We should pay teachers and lunch staff much better as well.
- wiredearp 4y ago
  I think that super power affiliation is perhaps a somewhat outdated definition of the three worlds concept and Britain certainly doesn't fit the modern one [1]. This guy argues that Britain is best thought of as a fourth world country [2] and he explains why the financial markets now compare Britain to a banana republic [3] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_World [2] https://eand.co/how-america-collapsed-and-became-a-fourth-world-country-db9829323a9a https://eand.co/how-america-collapsed-and-became-a-fourth-wo... [3] https://eand.co/britain-just-hit-the-next-level-of-self-destruction-and-the-pain-will-be-immense-ca254f87533c https://eand.co/britain-just-hit-the-next-level-of-self-dest...
  - tomrod 4y ago
    To keep the threadjack potential low, note that 4th world to Nth world countries' children should also not be starving.
pessimizer 4y ago
"starts"?

Gravityloss 4y ago

Can't think of a thing with a better benefit to cost ratio for a than providing school children a free meal. It's very cheap and it sucks very much if isn't done. This applies on society, government, municipality, village, family - so many levels.

adabyron 4y ago
Free school meals for all kids could simplify a lot of things. Obviously it could be paid for by an income based tax. Nation wide tax makes most sense to me. It's the cheapest & easy way to help these kids get nutrition. It benefits society more than the cost. It also prevents the need to waste money on lunch cards, payment systems & some poor lady having to manage & collect payments.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  > Free school meals for all kids could simplify a lot of things. A universal benefit guarantees 100% utilization. If you put in bureaucracy and/or a token payment, people will fail to navigate it (and downstream bureaucracies with their own budgets can make it more difficult to navigate), so like magic the program becomes a lot cheaper (by leaving children hungry.)
  - BitwiseFool 4y ago
    >"A universal benefit guarantees 100% utilization" Not necessarily, I know a lot of progress has been made since I left school but back in my day there were some seriously low grade meals served at the cafeteria. It was not uncommon for other kids to bring lunchables and homemade meals to eat instead and we'd throw out the tray of food provided to us. I'm not anti-free school meals for all, however. I just wanted to add the caveat that the 100% utilization metric is not quite as it seems.
    - denton-scratch 4y ago
      My kids wouldn't eat the (paid-for) hot school meals. They both preferred the sandwiches I made for them.

PuppyTailWags 4y ago

Good faith-ly asking here: What, if any, are the political arguments against government-provided 3 square meals a day for kids provided by default? Breakfast, lunch, and a little pickup baggie to go home with. The kids who don't need it/don't want it can just opt out of the program, but the floor is everyone gets to eat. I'd gladly pay more taxes even though my children aren't at risk.

adabyron 4y ago
The little pickup baggie is a great idea schools should implement, especially children with long bus rides. Most kids are starving once they get home.
- ljf 4y ago
  Over the summer holidays my office had free lunch bags for kids - your kids could come to the office, or you could take the bags with you. Any bags that weren't taken by 6.30pm were given away through Olio, so were with people who wanted them outside the business ASAP - they were collected by a local Olio rep, and with people how wanted them sometimes by 7pm. Pretty cheap for our company to run - helped out parents who needed it, was fun for the kids that got to come in and then zero waste as it all went out to other local families if we didn't use it all.
nathan_compton 4y ago
Kids should be able to eat for free. I believe the arguments against it are more or less: 1) I don't want to pay more taxes 2) Won't this make their parents less desperate and thus more able to choose their working conditions? 3) Will this encourage poor people to have too many kids? 4) I just don't like the idea of anyone getting anything without working for it.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

mtalantikite 4y ago

For those curious, the Black Panther Party was one of the major drivers to getting the free breakfast programs going in schools across the US. The FBI of course hated that, but what we have today is largely thanks to their organizing efforts. [1] And as others have commented, there seems to be little reason not to provide at least two meals a day to kids in schools. Besides "it's socialism" from those that seem to hate other humans in need. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Breakfast_for_Children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Breakfast_for_Children

selimthegrim 4y ago
They also got many black judges appointed at the state level in California.
krapp 4y ago
The fact of the matter is, if all American schoolchildren were white, school lunches wouldn't even be controversial.
- sublinear 4y ago
  Any difference can give rise to discrimination. It would just move up to the next least expensive items such as books, transportation, etc. Would schools even need to exist if everyone was the same?

mensetmanusman 4y ago

So sad. Almost a million people in the UK living off less than £7k per year is surprising.

3qz 4y ago

In Canada we don’t feed kids at school. If a kid doesn’t bring lunch, it’s their parents fault. If that happens frequently it’s considered child abuse. Lots of elementary schools here (mine) don’t even have a cafeteria! I was surprised when I found out that we’re one of the few developed countries that doesnt have any kind of lunch program. I feel like our system works fine though and since I’ve seen the garbage that American children are fed I think it’s actually better this way

socialismisok 4y ago
Why is the best way not "provide a healthy meal (or two) in a centralized way"? Cafeterias can produce healthy meals efficiently and cheaply, compared to distributing that labor to every parent. And then you don't need to monitor kids for parents not providing meals, which eliminates a whole cost. And worst of all, no kids should have to not eat because their parents fucked up. It sets them so far behind. Every meal a kid misses is a failure on all of us.
goalieca 4y ago
>I feel like our system works fine though and since I’ve seen the garbage that American children are fed I think it’s actually better this way I'm canadian and i'm always tired of this smug "we're better than the americans" attitude. It's quite ignorant of the facts and lazy to addressing our problems.
rvieira 4y ago
> In Canada we don’t feed kids at school. If a kid doesn’t bring lunch, it’s their parents fault. If that happens frequently it’s considered child abuse Why is this system better than: Feed kids at school. If a school doesn't do it it's their fault. If it happens frequently the director is fired.

koolba 4y ago

The other social benefit for free school meals is that all the kids eat the same food together at the same table. Literally breaking bread together with no class separation. That pays dividends on all sides for years to come. It’s a real shame this isn’t a universal thing.

elsquid 4y ago

I have told my wife and maybe one other person about this in my life. The most trouble I was ever in during my childhood was for being caught stealing food from the school cafeteria. My parents were too proud to admit they needed help, and certainly not from the government, so I had none. The school didn't have any empathy either. I stole lunch (and as much as I could eat because it would probably be all I ate) every day for almost an entire school year before they caught me. They knew how much was missing over that period of time and put it all on me (no idea if I was the only one doing this). I hope they help these kids.