The rationales in the article make a lot of sense to me, and I don't really see a downside to streamlining things like that. Especially the reasoning that "ever

The rationales in the article make a lot of sense to me, and I don't really see a downside to streamlining things like that. Especially the reasoning that "everything else is free [to children]", so why run the lunch room like a business? At Catholic school, lunch was fraught with peril for me. Firstly we had all the cute lunchboxes and peer pressure to have a good one (I got Star Wars, mostly.) Mom usually packed our lunches, and I hated Mom's food, so I grudgingly ate enough to stave off hunger, and discarded the rest (especially fresh fruit: oranges yuck!) I had no concept of this thing kids do where they trade food back and forth. In fact, I enjoyed no clique or circle of friends to eat with, so cafeteria time was distinctly unpleasant and lonely for me, and I longed to get outside, to the playground, ASAP. We also had "hot lunch" which was fairly unhealthy stuff like Sloppy Joes. It was fresher and more appetizing than Mom's, so I sort of looked forward to it. It did cost, and we purchased little milk cartons too, and so there was definitely cash-handling involved in many school lunchtimes, on the order of dimes and quarters per day. I don't know if 100%-school-provided lunch would've moved the needle on my nutrition at the time. But I was definitely developing poor dietary habits, and there was no sufficient adult oversight to prevent that slide.