4 ms·

US schools are some of the best funded in the world. The causative relationship of funding on student performance is not strong. Social programs such as Medica

US schools are some of the best funded in the world. The causative relationship of funding on student performance is not strong. Social programs such as Medicare, SSI, etc dwarf the military budget.

BugsJustFindMe 5mo ago
> The causative relationship of funding on student performance is not strong. Please don't pretend that "school funding" is the same as feeding children or that we don't have established research showing a connection between school meal programs and improved academic performance and reduced student suspensions.
- rayiner 5mo ago
  We spend $100 billion a year on SNAP, which goes primarily to feeding children and mothers. Why is it so important to you to structure the program in one way (providing kids lunches in school) versus feeding kids a different way (providing parents cash to feed their kids)?
  - FireBeyond 5mo ago
    On one hand, studies on outcomes... ... on the other, your "way of life". But why, to answer your question? Because those studies show, among other thing, that a non-negligible number of parents, given cash, can't or won't use it to feed their kids.
    - rayiner 5mo ago
      Why should a system that's already designed for a fraction of the population be further beholden to an even smaller fraction of the population? The SNAP system we have is good, and it's generous. The SNAP benefit for my family of five (two adults, three kids) would be $1,183 a month, which is about what we spend on groceries shopping at ALDI and LIDL. It's good to let parents choose how to use that money to feed their kids, instead of the government imposing a top-down, one-size-fits all system.
      - anigbrowl 5mo ago
        Why do conservatives hate doing anything for children so much? WTF. He gave you a clear answer which you just ignored so you could repeat your ideal of how things should work instead of addressing the realities of how they do. You are smart enough to understand the difference, but chose to give a BS reply.
        rayiner 5mo ago
        It’s not liberal versus conservative. I’m a liberal on this. I support SNAP. It’s a generous benefit and that’s okay with me. We should give parents plenty of money to make sure their kids can eat. Your position isn’t just liberal, it’s post-liberal. You’re saying that it’s not enough to have cash benefits that gives parents reasonable choices in feeding their kids. It’s not about having broad-based policies that work for the typical person in need. It’s a post-liberalism that’s obsessed with changing systems that work for normal people to cater to the most dysfunctional few percent of the population.
        deleted 5mo ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 5mo ago
        [deleted]
        anigbrowl 5mo ago
        Bullshit. Free school lunches for all are a simple, bureaucracy-minimizing way to ensure that all kids get fed while they're at school without discrimination (eg treating poor kids conspicuously differently). You said in an adjacent subthread that you'd love if there were universal school lunches like in Japan, then cooked up a bunch of abstract reasons for why that 'isn't possible.' If you think it's a good thing, then there's no need to stand in the way of it.
- GerryAdamsSF 5mo ago
  [flagged]
  - tim-tday 5mo ago
    You are misreading the science. The parental effect only shows up for the immediate parents not grandparents. Hereditary causes would result in persistent effects. The cause is therefore not genetics but rather family environment. (See studies of children of immigrants) Successful and wealthy parents support their children, giving them a calm and supportive environment in which to excel. (Poor parents who do that have high achieving children even if they themselves didn’t achieve at a high level). It’s not genetics it’s environment.
    - GerryAdamsSF 5mo ago
      No, this is what twin studies are. One twin raised in rich environment performs similarly to those in poor environments academically.
  - hackable_sand 5mo ago
    It's not, you just have a supremacist world view that requires alternative facts to stay coherent.

US schools are some of the best funded in the world. The causative relationship of funding on student performance is not strong. Social programs such as Medicare, SSI, etc dwarf the military budget.

BugsJustFindMe 5mo ago

> The causative relationship of funding on student performance is not strong. Please don't pretend that "school funding" is the same as feeding children or that we don't have established research showing a connection between school meal programs and improved academic performance and reduced student suspensions.

rayiner 5mo ago
We spend $100 billion a year on SNAP, which goes primarily to feeding children and mothers. Why is it so important to you to structure the program in one way (providing kids lunches in school) versus feeding kids a different way (providing parents cash to feed their kids)?
- FireBeyond 5mo ago
  On one hand, studies on outcomes... ... on the other, your "way of life". But why, to answer your question? Because those studies show, among other thing, that a non-negligible number of parents, given cash, can't or won't use it to feed their kids.
  - rayiner 5mo ago
    Why should a system that's already designed for a fraction of the population be further beholden to an even smaller fraction of the population? The SNAP system we have is good, and it's generous. The SNAP benefit for my family of five (two adults, three kids) would be $1,183 a month, which is about what we spend on groceries shopping at ALDI and LIDL. It's good to let parents choose how to use that money to feed their kids, instead of the government imposing a top-down, one-size-fits all system.
    - anigbrowl 5mo ago
      Why do conservatives hate doing anything for children so much? WTF. He gave you a clear answer which you just ignored so you could repeat your ideal of how things should work instead of addressing the realities of how they do. You are smart enough to understand the difference, but chose to give a BS reply.
      - rayiner 5mo ago
        It’s not liberal versus conservative. I’m a liberal on this. I support SNAP. It’s a generous benefit and that’s okay with me. We should give parents plenty of money to make sure their kids can eat. Your position isn’t just liberal, it’s post-liberal. You’re saying that it’s not enough to have cash benefits that gives parents reasonable choices in feeding their kids. It’s not about having broad-based policies that work for the typical person in need. It’s a post-liberalism that’s obsessed with changing systems that work for normal people to cater to the most dysfunctional few percent of the population.
        deleted 5mo ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 5mo ago
        [deleted]
        anigbrowl 5mo ago
        Bullshit. Free school lunches for all are a simple, bureaucracy-minimizing way to ensure that all kids get fed while they're at school without discrimination (eg treating poor kids conspicuously differently). You said in an adjacent subthread that you'd love if there were universal school lunches like in Japan, then cooked up a bunch of abstract reasons for why that 'isn't possible.' If you think it's a good thing, then there's no need to stand in the way of it.
GerryAdamsSF 5mo ago
[flagged]
- tim-tday 5mo ago
  You are misreading the science. The parental effect only shows up for the immediate parents not grandparents. Hereditary causes would result in persistent effects. The cause is therefore not genetics but rather family environment. (See studies of children of immigrants) Successful and wealthy parents support their children, giving them a calm and supportive environment in which to excel. (Poor parents who do that have high achieving children even if they themselves didn’t achieve at a high level). It’s not genetics it’s environment.
  - GerryAdamsSF 5mo ago
    No, this is what twin studies are. One twin raised in rich environment performs similarly to those in poor environments academically.
- hackable_sand 5mo ago
  It's not, you just have a supremacist world view that requires alternative facts to stay coherent.