Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Grainne who wrote (19718)	4/3/1998 9:08:00 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Well Christine, it seems your memory is seriously lacking again, so I guess I will have to give you a history lesson, fortunately I'm bored and have the time...:-) The discussion of the school lunch program began when I made this statement. <<<The same thing is done by the liberal mainstream media when discussing social issues. They will find a very small minority effected negatively by say, school lunch cuts, and then make the argument that the evil Congress is starving children.>>> You then aswered with this diatribe... <<<<<Thirty percent of the children in California, a very wealthy state in general, live below the poverty line. Many of them go to school hungry, and numerous studies have shown that hungry children do not concentrate well and have trouble learning. So I am not sure how you can logically argue that reductions in money for school lunches are not starving children, or not doing harm to a population that is already at risk. Wouldn't it be nice to help these children instead of take food away from them? Perhaps fewer of them would end up as criminals if they learned enough in school to get good jobs.>>>>>> Now you seem to be saying that privatizing the school lunch program will lower costs and improve the product?? So who exactly is confused here Christine?? :-) Michael