View Full Version : The Federal Government Wants to Feed Your Kids...
Government Wants to Feed All Kids
Nearly forty percent of all elementary and high school students in the US already receive government funded lunches, but school administrators say that’s not enough! They want to remove the stigma in getting free meals, swelling the ranks of federally fed students above today’s 31 million, and increasing annual costs beyond the $8.3 billion we spend today. Bureaucrats across the country told the New York Times they want to destroy the natural – and appropriate – embarrassment many kids feel about getting taxpayer funded meals while their friends buy their own food. Officials in New York say “more eligible students would eat if all school cafeterias offered free meals to everyone, regardless of economic status.” If government feeds all kids for free, then why should any mom take the time and trouble to pack lunch for her offspring? The inexorable growth of “Nanny State” big government increasingly usurps the role of parents and inevitably weakens the importance of families.
Ref: http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/a82b4460-ade4-4d91-a0fa-bcd1f575233b
What say you?
N5NPO
03-18-2008, 11:31 AM
The uber-right wing knuckle dragging capitalistic nazi homo-phobic mean-spirited facists neo-cons want all the children to starve. If it were up to them, no children would eat, have healthcare, a place to sleep or clothes to wear. This program to feed all the childen free is a great program. They should also house and medicate all the children there at the schools. This would prevent a multitude of societys ills. Parents are inept and incapable of properly caring for and raising children. This job is way too important to be left to the average american citizen. Children should be raised and educated by the governement profesionals who have their best interest in mind. Children should be provided with Governemnt Funded Health-care, Food-care, Home-care and Chlothing-care. Everyone would have equal health, food, housing and chlothing. There would be no need for any stigma attached because eveyone would be equal.
See, there is such a thing as a free lunch.
Government Wants to Feed All Kids
Nearly forty percent of all elementary and high school students in the US already receive government funded lunches, but school administrators say that’s not enough! They want to remove the stigma in getting free meals, swelling the ranks of federally fed students above today’s 31 million, and increasing annual costs beyond the $8.3 billion we spend today. Bureaucrats across the country told the New York Times they want to destroy the natural – and appropriate – embarrassment many kids feel about getting taxpayer funded meals while their friends buy their own food. Officials in New York say “more eligible students would eat if all school cafeterias offered free meals to everyone, regardless of economic status.” If government feeds all kids for free, then why should any mom take the time and trouble to pack lunch for her offspring? The inexorable growth of “Nanny State” big government increasingly usurps the role of parents and inevitably weakens the importance of families.
Ref: http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/a82b4460-ade4-4d91-a0fa-bcd1f575233b
What say you?
Just one more step.
It's the same with health care. The SCHIP debacle this year gave good insight into the nanny state mentality. If we cover poor kids, middle class kids, minority kids, and old people the only ones left will be those paying for their own health care coverage, AND EVERYBODY ELSES through taxes. They will be forced into line sooner or later.
Classic divide and conquer.
Somebody explain to me how it got to be the governments job to provide health care FOR ANYBODY, then having the gall to ask other to pay for it.
Simple discussions about topics as this are useless with the uneducated or purposely ignorant. There are volumes of textbooks on these subjects including psychological development, economic growth contributions, physical development, constitutional and political sciences, and many others. But many choose to remain ignorant and ignore the massive studies on the very topics they boast they know everything about.
Do we care about the subject matter? Do we care about our fellow countrymen as their success builds our nation's success? Will we rather wear our fingers to the bone with the Chinese Handcuffs rather than seeking professional help with our distress?
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/Q/B/bush_chinese_handcuffs.jpg
The rise or decline of our nation is in our hands. What do you want to do about it?
N5NPO
03-21-2008, 12:41 AM
Simple discussions about topics as this are useless with the uneducated or purposely ignorant. There are volumes of textbooks on these subjects including psychological development, economic growth contributions, physical development, constitutional and political sciences, and many others. But many choose to remain ignorant and ignore the massive studies on the very topics they boast they know everything about.
Do we care about the subject matter? Do we care about our fellow countrymen as their success builds our nation's success? Will we rather wear our fingers to the bone with the Chinese Handcuffs rather than seeking professional help with our distress?
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/Q/B/bush_chinese_handcuffs.jpg
The rise or decline of our nation is in our hands. What do you want to do about it?
Want to elaborate a bit for us un-educated ones there Jerry?
kd8dey
03-21-2008, 01:05 AM
Government Wants to Feed All Kids
Nearly forty percent of all elementary and high school students in the US already receive government funded lunches, but school administrators say that’s not enough! They want to remove the stigma in getting free meals, swelling the ranks of federally fed students above today’s 31 million, and increasing annual costs beyond the $8.3 billion we spend today. Bureaucrats across the country told the New York Times they want to destroy the natural – and appropriate – embarrassment many kids feel about getting taxpayer funded meals while their friends buy their own food. Officials in New York say “more eligible students would eat if all school cafeterias offered free meals to everyone, regardless of economic status.” If government feeds all kids for free, then why should any mom take the time and trouble to pack lunch for her offspring? The inexorable growth of “Nanny State” big government increasingly usurps the role of parents and inevitably weakens the importance of families.
Ref: http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/a82b4460-ade4-4d91-a0fa-bcd1f575233b
What say you?
Wonder what ever happened to all the "Gubmint" cheese, Peanut butter, butter stockpiles from all the agricultural substities??? I miss gubmint cheese.
People would go past the place where I worked on a monthly basis with their bag of Gubmint grub and would gladly sell their 5lb block of Gubmint Cheese for 5 bux, 2 lb Peanut butter or Lb of butter for a buk. sometimes the whole bag if they were in a hurry for 5 bux. (mid 80's). &%*&$ I miss my Gubmint Cheese Sammiches :D
Government Wants to Feed All Kids
Nearly forty percent of all elementary and high school students in the US already receive government funded lunches, but school administrators say that’s not enough! They want to remove the stigma in getting free meals, swelling the ranks of federally fed students above today’s 31 million, and increasing annual costs beyond the $8.3 billion we spend today. Bureaucrats across the country told the New York Times they want to destroy the natural – and appropriate – embarrassment many kids feel about getting taxpayer funded meals while their friends buy their own food. Officials in New York say “more eligible students would eat if all school cafeterias offered free meals to everyone, regardless of economic status.” If government feeds all kids for free, then why should any mom take the time and trouble to pack lunch for her offspring? The inexorable growth of “Nanny State” big government increasingly usurps the role of parents and inevitably weakens the importance of families.
Ref: http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/a82b4460-ade4-4d91-a0fa-bcd1f575233b
What say you?
Don't like it? Send your kids to private school or homeschool them.
You do have that choice.
N3ATS
03-21-2008, 01:41 AM
They want to feed my kid? Great! Where do I send the bill?
N5NPO
03-21-2008, 01:47 AM
They want to feed my kid? Great! Where do I send the bill?
Just send it to some productive working member of society... They are paying for almost eveything else.
KD6NIG
03-21-2008, 01:57 AM
They want to feed my kid? Great! Where do I send the bill?
Maybe I can get them to feed my truck every week so I can get to work too. Then I wouldn't have to worry about the price of gas!
kf6rdn
03-21-2008, 02:06 AM
Don't like it? Send your kids to private school or homeschool them.
You do have that choice.
That's a hard option, I already pay taxes to send my kids to public school, I would be double paying since they dont give me the option to send my kid anywhere else thanks to the teachers unions around here, they're even taking the home school option away.
In some school districts that are poor, over 90% of the children qualify for free lunches. It costs a lot of money to qualify, verify income, etc. To that end, if a district has over a certain percentage the federal government will just give free lunches to all students. It actually saves tax dollars in those cases. We used to live in such a district. It was kind of nice not having to send lunch money with our boys. My dad however, would have never stood for it. He was too proud to accept anything free.
n2ize
03-21-2008, 11:22 AM
Speaking as a conservative Rush Limbaugh worshiping dunderhead I write the following:
Free lunches ?? Oh my God. It's the end of our nation !! This is communism !! Pure unadulterated communism !! Today it's free lunches, tomorrow it's health care !! This must be the work of ultra left wing liberals like Hillary and Pelosi working in conjunction with Soros, Barbara Streisand and Jane Fonda. This has the work of radical left wing liberalist feminist communism writtenall over it. As a loving compassionate conservative I think we should have school starvation programs. Or at least jack up the prices of school lunches. I think $50.00 per plate would be a fair price. And health care. We need to RAISE thr price of health care. How else are all those poor CEO's going to get richer and richer if we don;t raise those prices. After all, we must humble ourselves to them and dig deeper into our pockets. And if you get sick and go bankrupt paying for it then tough. You either didn't work hard enough or you retired when you shoulkd have worked till you dropped. Now you want your kid to get a free bee.
Now pardon me, I gotta run. The Rush Limbaugh show is coming on the radio.
N3ATS
03-21-2008, 01:50 PM
Just send it to some productive working member of society... They are paying for almost eveything else.
Right. Maybe we need to start sucking off the government tit too? It seems to be en vogue right now, so why not? I wonder just how much I can get? You know, maybe get a little BACK for once.
kc2orw
03-21-2008, 02:50 PM
Now pardon me, I gotta run. The Rush Limbaugh show is coming on the radio.
Yup don't want to miss one jingle of "Barack the Magic Negro" or the endless sample loops of "Osama Obama".
Just think yall can listen to that "Noo Yawk Lon Guyland" fellow Sean Hannity and hear even more sampled loops. Man these guys do more scratchin, samplin, and loopin then the Rapper's and DJ's do :D
That's a hard option, I already pay taxes to send my kids to public school, I would be double paying since they dont give me the option to send my kid anywhere else thanks to the teachers unions around here, they're even taking the home school option away.
But it's still an option.
I have no kids (yet) but I am paying an insane amount of property taxes to support local public schools. So do many others, including people who intend to not ever have kids.
If you don't like what your kids are getting in public schools, you are free to take them out.
Besides, does having the availiability of a free lunch mean that you can't pack a lunch for your kids?
they floated the idea of a public boarding school for at risk kids in Chicago last week to see how it would play in the court of public opinion.
KW4MW
03-21-2008, 05:06 PM
A former co-worker of mine once related to me that due to his income and number of children (4), his kids were entitled to reduced lunchroom rates. However he saw no need of partaking of that "entitlement" since he knew that he could afford the full price of their lunches and he felt obligated to not opt for the reduced rates.
His children begged him to reconsider. They all attended inner city schools and they knew that anyone paying the full price for a meal was perceived by the reduced rate crowd as showing off and/or considering themselves being better than everybody else. Sadly, those kids paying full fare would be the subject of harassment, physical threats and sometimes actual physical harm.
Besides, the kids said, it was cool to have meal tickets.
He relented, not for the reduced rate, not because his kids thought it was cool but simply for their safety and peace of mind.
So what's the issue here?
Is it thet NL7W wants to show the world that he has money? Or at least his kid's classmates?
kc2orw
03-21-2008, 07:03 PM
So what's the issue here?
Is it thet NL7W wants to show the world that he has money? Or at least his kid's classmates?
Probably 90% of what he says is related to some brag or the other.
He may even qualify as the new Commander McBragg :D
That's a hard option, I already pay taxes to send my kids to public school, I would be double paying since they dont give me the option to send my kid anywhere else thanks to the teachers unions around here, they're even taking the home school option away.
So what your saying is, you'll only send your kids to a school where the government is already paying for it - government meaning you and me...
I know of lots of people, most of them decidedly middle class who send their kids to private schools or homeschool despite the fact that they pay property taxes that support public schools. I guess they must have gotten a choice that you don't have.
When private schools have to take everyone who walks through their doors, rich, poor, bright, special needs, and everything else, I'll support vouchers. Until then, now way.
kc9jwa
03-21-2008, 08:05 PM
I remember when i and many others went to school, the stress of the parents paying for books, lunches, clothes, supplies, ect. It cost parents alot of money for that and tha't s just public. My mom sent me and my four sisters to a private school, safer, better, religoius, ect. It cost alot more only thing free was one kid, still cost 4000bucks. And then you gotta pay for your own lunches, pop machines, at least the gov coulda help out with free meals, least now our goverment kinda finally payin off a little, this world so greedy it make sme very angry. For goodness sake it cost to use the phone it's a very sad world. I am still shocked that alot of people get the summer rebate, 600 for us why not 1200 i do not know, im shocked someone paying somethin to alot of people for once, sure aint from our jerk, so many words and cursing i wanna say but cant to that almighty gov sam.:mad: But i tell ya one thing he will barely help out the ''USA'', but give millions to others in other countrys starving what about your own country first. I cant believe people die for this country and when thier in need of help the best they get is the streets mainly.
Speaking as a conservative Rush Limbaugh worshiping dunderhead I write the following:
Free lunches ?? Oh my God. It's the end of our nation !! This is communism !! Pure unadulterated communism !! Today it's free lunches, tomorrow it's health care !! This must be the work of ultra left wing liberals like Hillary and Pelosi working in conjunction with Soros, Barbara Streisand and Jane Fonda. This has the work of radical left wing liberalist feminist communism writtenall over it. As a loving compassionate conservative I think we should have school starvation programs. Or at least jack up the prices of school lunches. I think $50.00 per plate would be a fair price. And health care. We need to RAISE thr price of health care. How else are all those poor CEO's going to get richer and richer if we don;t raise those prices. After all, we must humble ourselves to them and dig deeper into our pockets. And if you get sick and go bankrupt paying for it then tough. You either didn't work hard enough or you retired when you shoulkd have worked till you dropped. Now you want your kid to get a free bee.
Now pardon me, I gotta run. The Rush Limbaugh show is coming on the radio.
A pure, refined, unadulterated, SOCIALIST speaks.
A pure, refined, unadulterated, SOCIALIST speaks.
Make no mistake about it . He needs a micro bus with flowers painted on it. Wait maybe he has one.
N3ATS
03-22-2008, 02:22 AM
There is no such thing as a "free lunch". ;)
Go to WalMart, buy some bread & bologna, get some 6-packs of applesauce or other fruit, get some peanut-butter crackers, and stuff it in a bag. Lunch for $1.
KA8NCR
03-22-2008, 03:48 AM
What part of "but school administrators say that’s not enough".
That's not the federal government, that's liberal school administrators. Slight difference.
Government Wants to Feed All Kids
Bureaucrats across the country told the New York Times they want to destroy the natural – and appropriate – embarrassment many kids feel about getting taxpayer funded meals while their friends buy their own food...
What say you?
Steve! I think your brains are frozen! You and your source are using the NY Times as a source?!?? Don't you know that's VERBOTEN? Using the Commie Socialists that the Coulter sent Anthrax to as a source?
Does the Uber-Kons in Alaska know about this?:eek:
A pure, refined, unadulterated, SOCIALIST speaks.
Well, we can't all be Pure, Unadulterated, Aryan, FASCISTS who let Michael Medved tell us how to think like you. :rolleyes:
There is no such thing as a "free lunch". ;)
Go to Wal-Mart, buy some bread & bologna, get some 6-packs of applesauce or other fruit, get some peanut-butter crackers, and stuff it in a bag. Lunch for $1.
If my 6-year old wants a hot school lunch, he has to pay $2.30. Obviously, He (we) do not "qualify" for reduced cost or "free lunches." Obviously, we're paying for the others' lunches through taxes -- more income redistribution.
I'd rather have my wife or I pack my kids' lunches; we know what goes into them -- healthier food for less cost. And most assuredly, they are packed with special, personal healthy treats and notes of love and encouragement.
Let's see the government take away this small act of attentive and abiding care and love for our "dear ones" away -- feeding our loved ones.
That'll be the day!
Well, we can't all be Pure, Unadulterated, Aryan, FASCISTS who let Michael Medved tell us how to think like you. :rolleyes:
By all means... let the Fed-rule Gub-ment take care of you and chill'en. Abdicate your responsibilities. It is what you do best, right? Only in NYC.........
Chow.
n2ize
03-22-2008, 08:45 AM
If my 6-year old wants a hot school lunch, he has to pay $2.30.
He's not paying enough. I think you should tell him to give them at least $10.00. Even if it costs only 2.30 (a freebee) insist that they take the $10.00. That way you can make sure that nobody will think you're a pinko.
He's not paying enough. I think you should tell him to give them at least $10.00. Even if it costs only 2.30 (a freebee) insist that they take the $10.00. That way you can make sure that nobody will think you're a pinko.
Ten Dolla'? That's probably what they cost for the "rich" people of NYC School District, right? It's no wonder NYC wants to have everyone eat their "manufactured meals" -- there's money to be made by some lucky, few, liberally corrupt politicians!
---
The reason I know the cost of hot lunch, is that my 6-year old asked to try one about two days ago -- inquiring for the first time this year.
Sorry, Johnny... My kids have their lunches lovingly packed each and every day by their PARENTS.
Toodles.
What part of "but school administrators say that’s not enough".
That's not the federal government, that's liberal school administrators. Slight difference.
In the end, where does the funding come from? It ain't NYC... it's the feds.
Pump up the Volume, pump up the Administration. School Districts and their liberal administrators are classic kingdom-builders.
73.
n2ize
03-22-2008, 09:09 AM
Ten Dolla'? That's probably what they cost for the "rich" people of NYC School District, right? It's no wonder NYC wants to have everyone eat their "manufactured meals" -- there's money to be made by some lucky, few, liberally corrupt politicians!
---
The reason I know the cost of hot lunch, is that my 6-year old asked to try one about two days ago -- inquiring for the first time this year.
Are you telling me that you're kids go to a public school ? Isn't that against your principles ? Shouldn;t you be homeschooling orsending your kids to a private school ?
Sorry, Johnny... My kids have their lunches lovingly packed each and every day by their PARENTS.
Toodles.
And I could care less what you do. Nobody is forcing you to use the school lunch program. It's just that some people feel that investing tax money in things like education, school nutrition, is a good thing. Some even feel it';s better than spending tax money on corrupt wars and destruction and disruption of other peoples lives while pretending and brainwashing themselves to imagine that we are doing a great service to the world.
n2ize
03-22-2008, 09:24 AM
Ten Dolla'? That's probably what they cost for the "rich" people of NYC School District, right? I
Toodles.
yes, indeed we are quite rich here in NY. Not only do we have the best public education including highly acclaimed public schools like Stuyvesant High School, Bronx High School of Science and many other schools that produce some of the top and most successful graduates in the nation, but we also have some of the top colleges and universities in the nation, as well as close proximity to other top schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Rutgers, MIT, etc. to name a few. We have tons of the best and top paying jobs in the nation. Jobs in technology, finance, management, art, music, education,...take your pick. Add to that a superb public transportation systems, among the best entertainment resources in the world including the theatre both on Broadway (the famous Great White Way) and off Broadway, incredible cultural diversity, the finest public research libraries, 2 major airports, the finest restaurants of any type you can imagine, the finest hotels, and a wide range of housing resources for all. take a short drive just outside of NYC and you're greeted by some of the most prestigious crime free suburbs in the world. And speaking of crime, DOJ statistics show that NYC has about the lowest crime rate of any city of it;s type in the nation.
So yes indeed, we are quite wealthy.. I wouldn't trade living here for any place else. Living in NY makes it impossible to be envious of anyone.
Ta Ta.
Are you telling me that you're kids go to a public school ? Isn't that against your principles ? Shouldn;t you be homeschooling orsending your kids to a private school ?
And I could care less what you do. Nobody is forcing you to use the school lunch program. It's just that some people feel that investing tax money in things like education, school nutrition, is a good thing. Some even feel it';s better than spending tax money on corrupt wars and destruction and disruption of other peoples lives while pretending and brainwashing themselves to imagine that we are doing a great service to the world.
Always the same from the pacifist wanting to take more and more from me and other industrious folks for redistribution to those with less. Equality doesn't exist in this world -- your "feelings" that long to liberalize societal ills will always fall short and fail -- for there's never anything quite good enough or equal enough. It's rather sad... liberalism is a mental disorder.
Cheerio.
n2ize
03-22-2008, 09:47 AM
Always the same from the pacifist wanting to take more and more from me and other industrious folks for redistribution to those with less. Equality doesn't exist in this world -- your "feelings" that long to liberalize societal ills will always fall short and fail
Actually your hypothesis is already falsified. "Liberalization" of societies ills is one of the things that helped build a robust middle class in this country. The same liberalism that guys like you like to rail about is the reason many of you got the education that you did and got you where you are today. Why do you hate the middle class so much ?
-- for there's never anything quite good enough or equal enough.
So then you would prefer the type of society that was prevalent in England for many years and that which prevailed in this country during the Gilded age when you had the "haves" and the "have not's" and no real middle class to speak of. That was the ultimate era of pure capitalism.when socialism was at a minimum and you either "had it" or you didn't. It was also a time when the idea of "pulling yourself up by the bootstraps" and "struggling against the odds" simply did not exist because there were no odds to struggle against and there was no room for growth. Whatever class you were born into you remained in for life. Unless some wealthy person took it on their mercy to bring you into a better life you stayed right where you are. Matter of fact some places even prohibited educating members the poor labouring class.
It's rather sad... liberalism is a mental disorder.
Cheerio.
Yeah, copy Ann Coulter, how original. You're getting mundane Steve, good night.
P.S. As was pointed out a couple weeks ago science has proved that conservatism is actually a mental disorder.
Ta Ta.
Actually your hypothesis is already falsified. "Liberalization" of societies ills is one of the things that helped build a robust middle class in this country. The same liberalism that guys like you like to rail about is the reason many of you got the education that you did and got you where you are today. Why do you hate the middle class so much ?
So then you would prefer the type of society that was prevalent in England for many years and that which prevailed in this country during the Gilded age when you had the "haves" and the "have not's" and no real middle class to speak of. That was the ultimate era of pure capitalism.when socialism was at a minimum and you either "had it" or you didn't. It was also a time when the idea of "pulling yourself up by the bootstraps" and "struggling against the odds" simply did not exist because there were no odds to struggle against and there was no room for growth. Whatever class you were born into you remained in for life. Unless some wealthy person took it on their mercy to bring you into a better life you stayed right where you are. Matter of fact some places even prohibited educating members the poor labouring class.
Yeah, copy Ann Coulter, how original. You're getting mundane Steve, good night.
P.S. As was pointed out a couple weeks ago science has proved that conservatism is actually a mental disorder.
Ta Ta.
But this is America! You keep forgetting that. Everyday -- millionaires are made. Everyday -- muliti-millionaires are made.
Capitalism and opportunity go hand-in-hand. You socialist lefties keep forgetting that.
Life is what you make it in this country!
Oh yeah, how many millionaires are made in Great Britain each year? Then, compare that to the good, old U.S.A.
Come back then...
Toodles.
Sorry, Johnny... My kids have their lunches lovingly packed each and every day by their PARENTS.
Toodles.
As far as I understand, giving out free lunches at school won't prevent you from doing that.
So I don't see why you're making this into such a big f'in deal.
n2ize
03-23-2008, 03:16 AM
But this is America! You keep forgetting that. Everyday -- millionaires are made. Everyday -- muliti-millionaires are made.
Capitalism and opportunity go hand-in-hand. You socialist lefties keep forgetting that.
Life is what you make it in this country!
Oh yeah, how many millionaires are made in Great Britain each year? Then, compare that to the good, old U.S.A.
Come back then...
Toodles.
Not good Stevie, not good at all. Matter of fact quite lame... to put it mildly.
n4sva
03-23-2008, 03:21 AM
Want to elaborate a bit for us un-educated ones there Jerry?
Oh come on Norm! You know we were not psychologically developed as a country until we got the free school lunch program. :D
W1GUH
03-23-2008, 04:21 AM
George Carlin did a great bit about this. First, he talked about all the people who say that a fetus is a human life and needs to be protected. Then, he goes on to point out that as soon as that fetus is born, it deserves no more support, and can starve as far as those "right to lifers" are concerned. You guys that condemn the government's programs to help our young people, don't you see the absolute hypocrisy in you views? Are you saying that you just don't care that young people starve? These are people that are blameless and are at the mercy of so many forces, and are powerless to do anything about it? What's with your cold, hard-hearted, "hate the kids" attitudes? You're immoral, selfish, and hopelessy clueless about real life.
AE6IP
03-23-2008, 04:34 AM
But this is America! You keep forgetting that. Everyday -- millionaires are made. Everyday -- muliti-millionaires are made.
Deflation will do that to an economy. But then, every day, paupers are made in this country as well.
Capitalism and opportunity go hand-in-hand.
Capitalism and exploitation go hand-in-hand.
It never ceases to amaze me, the number of people who are not themselves successful capitalists, who have bought into the myth of capitalism as some sort of magic formula.
But they also tend to be the same people who confuse bank balance with social success.
Can you shed some light on why such a correlation exists, Steve?
N5NPO
03-31-2008, 06:17 PM
[QUOTE=AE6IP;1174428]Deflation will do that to an economy. But then, every day, paupers are made in this country as well.
Capitalism and exploitation go hand-in-hand.
COMMUNISM IS EXPLOITATION.
People exploit people. So what can you do Marty?
I will take capitalism over anything else any day of the week.
Oh come on Norm! You know we were not psychologically developed as a country until we got the free school lunch program. :D
Yeah... but the kids get the daily dose of salt peter! :D:eek:
W8EFA
03-31-2008, 06:58 PM
Duplicate Post
W8EFA
03-31-2008, 06:59 PM
Government Wants to Feed All Kids
Nearly forty percent of all elementary and high school students in the US already receive government funded lunches, but school administrators say that’s not enough! They want to remove the stigma in getting free meals, swelling the ranks of federally fed students above today’s 31 million, and increasing annual costs beyond the $8.3 billion we spend today. Bureaucrats across the country told the New York Times they want to destroy the natural – and appropriate – embarrassment many kids feel about getting taxpayer funded meals while their friends buy their own food. Officials in New York say “more eligible students would eat if all school cafeterias offered free meals to everyone, regardless of economic status.” If government feeds all kids for free, then why should any mom take the time and trouble to pack lunch for her offspring? The inexorable growth of “Nanny State” big government increasingly usurps the role of parents and inevitably weakens the importance of families.
Ref: http://michaelmedved.townhall.com/blog/g/a82b4460-ade4-4d91-a0fa-bcd1f575233b
What say you?
What I say is this is just a bunch of BS from another idiot Blog Site from Rush Limbaughs stand in. The 40% number is just complete BS as is the whole article. I can't believe anyone would take anything serious from "Frozen Steve" anyway as he has proven time and again he is completely clueless.
The facts are :
Funded by a combination of Federal funds and matching State funds, the National School Lunch Program helps States provide a school lunch for all children at moderate cost. The National School Lunch Act of 1946 was amended in 1970 to provide free and reduced-price school lunches for children of needy families. The program is administered by the Food and Nutrition Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) through State educational agencies, or through regional USDA nutrition services for nonprofit private schools.
All students eating lunches prepared at participating schools pay less than the total cost of the lunches. Some students pay the "full established" price for lunch (which itself is subsidized); others pay a "reduced" price for lunch; and still others receive a "free" lunch. Students receiving free lunches live in households with incomes below 125 percent of the poverty level; students receiving reduced price lunches (10 to 20 cents per meal) live in households with incomes between 125 percent and 195 percent of the official poverty level. .
So what we have is a joint Federal and State program that has been around since 1946 that Schools can VOLUNTARILY decide to join which provides subsidized and free lunches to Poverty Level kids and subsidized to all other kids who's parents pay taxes!
I guess we should stop having the schools supply textbooks so Frozen Steve can buy his kids the books himself and lovingly inscibe them with best wishes inside the cover. If the State and Feds pay for textbooks out of outr taxes my God what will be next!!
He may even qualify as the new Commander McBragg :D
The frozen dimbulb of the north.
http://i29.tinypic.com/2h4kmc2.jpg
Don't like it? Send your kids to private school or homeschool them.
You do have that choice.
Not in California you don't.
N8UZE
03-31-2008, 08:36 PM
That was the ultimate era of pure capitalism.when socialism was at a minimum and you either "had it" or you didn't. It was also a time when the idea of "pulling yourself up by the bootstraps" and "struggling against the odds" simply did not exist because there were no odds to struggle against and there was no room for growth. Whatever class you were born into you remained in for life.
So explain Andrew Carnegie and so many of the other "robber barons" who started with nothing since one was "condemned" to remain in the class to which they were born.
n2ize
03-31-2008, 10:32 PM
So explain Andrew Carnegie and so many of the other "robber barons" who started with nothing since one was "condemned" to remain in the class to which they were born.
Carnegie didn't exactly start with "nothing". He did have access to certain resources that many of the nations poor did not have available at that time. While not wealthy he was born to a middle class merchant family who was literate and reasonably well educated. Being quite ambitious he wisely too advantage of the resources he had available too him. Resources that many of the nations laboring poor did not have available to them.
And while you can always point to a handful of self made multi billionaires history shows them to be far and few between. During that period there was a minimalist middle class. Upwards mobility from poor laborer to middle class professional were rare and the playing field was heavilly tilted against them. If you were born to a poor laboring family statistics show the odds were likely you would spend your life as a poor laborer. yes, there were exceptions to that rule, just as anything dealing with human life and human action there is always a chance of being an exception to the odds. However, it wasn't until much later, whence labor was organized, higher wages were negotioated, and labor regulations were enacted, among other things, that enabled a robust middle class to emerge, proper and grow.
k4kyv
04-01-2008, 03:06 AM
For the most part, this discussion has missed the point of the original topic. It's not a question of whether or not there should be free or reduced lunches for needy kids, but whether they should be handed out to everyone just to save the kids who presently qualify from being "embarrassed".
This is precisely the same kind of argument the FCC used when they reduced the code speed for General and Extra to 5 WPM... Someone had claimed that under the Americans with Disability Act, their "disability" that allegely precluded their passing the 13 or 20 wpm test, entitled them to exemption from the requirement. The FCC responded by granting a 5 WPM "waiver" to anyone who could produce a doctor's certificate attesting that he/she had a relevant disability. It didn't take long for the FCC to discover that many of those disabilities were bogus, so they conveniently solved the problem by granting the 5 WPM waiver to everyone, disabled or not.
Some schools have reportedly stopped publishing an Honor Roll because it might embarrass the kids who didn't qualify.
This is the same kind of nonsense that has grocery store clerks carding 70 years-olds when they buy beer or cigarettes in order to avoid "profiling" people by age.
So all that money going to feed the well-to-do will be taken away from kids who are truly needy, the reason free and reduced lunches were instituted in the first place.
But looking at it from another viewpoint, this proposal might have merit if implemented fairly and effectively. Nutrition would become part of the public education package along with textbooks and bus transport. Of course, taxes would rise slightly to pay the bill, in the same manner that they pay to heat the buildings. Well-to-do parents with kids in school would not have to pay outright for their kids' lunches, so they might actually come out ahead, since their kids' meals would be subsidised by those with no kids in school.
But to justify the program on the basis of "avoiding embarrassment" not only trivialises the whole concept; it makes it look downright ridiculous.
For the most part, this discussion has missed the point of the original topic. It's not a question of whether or not there should be free or reduced lunches for needy kids, but whether they should be handed out to everyone just to save the kids who presently qualify from being "embarrassed".
This is precisely the same kind of argument the FCC used when they reduced the code speed for General and Extra to 5 WPM... Someone had claimed that under the Americans with Disability Act, their "disability" that allegely precluded their passing the 13 or 20 wpm test, entitled them to exemption from the requirement. The FCC responded by granting a 5 WPM "waiver" to anyone who could produce a doctor's certificate attesting that he/she had a relevant disability. It didn't take long for the FCC to discover that many of those disabilities were bogus, so they conveniently solved the problem by granting the 5 WPM waiver to everyone, disabled or not.
Some schools have reportedly stopped publishing an Honor Roll because it might embarrass the kids who didn't qualify.
This is the same kind of nonsense that has grocery store clerks carding 70 years-olds when they buy beer or cigarettes in order to avoid "profiling" people by age.
So all that money going to feed the well-to-do will be taken away from kids who are truly needy, the reason free and reduced lunches were instituted in the first place.
But looking at it from another viewpoint, this proposal might have merit if implemented fairly and effectively. Nutrition would become part of the public education package along with textbooks and bus transport. Of course, taxes would rise slightly to pay the bill, in the same manner that they pay to heat the buildings. Well-to-do parents with kids in school would not have to pay outright for their kids' lunches, so they might actually come out ahead, since their kids' meals would be subsidised by those with no kids in school.
But to justify the program on the basis of "avoiding embarrassment" not only trivialises the whole concept; it makes it look downright ridiculous.
So right you are. The Libs pushing this politically correct non-embarrassment crapola are seriously deluded -- like so many lefty-loons living in their fantasy world.
My high school junior is striving ever harder after making the honor roll. He wants to stay there -- especially after receiving college/university recruitment letters by the dozens, to include secular schools like Cornell, and excellent Jesuit schools like Creighton, and Gonzaga. Differentiation is a good thing!
KB9BVN
04-01-2008, 10:24 AM
I remember when i and many others went to school, the stress of the parents paying for books, lunches, clothes, supplies, ect. It cost parents alot of money for that and tha't s just public. My mom sent me and my four sisters to a private school, safer, better, religoius, ect. It cost alot more only thing free was one kid, still cost 4000bucks. And then you gotta pay for your own lunches, pop machines, at least the gov coulda help out with free meals, least now our goverment kinda finally payin off a little, this world so greedy it make sme very angry. For goodness sake it cost to use the phone it's a very sad world. I am still shocked that alot of people get the summer rebate, 600 for us why not 1200 i do not know, im shocked someone paying somethin to alot of people for once, sure aint from our jerk, so many words and cursing i wanna say but cant to that almighty gov sam.:mad: But i tell ya one thing he will barely help out the ''USA'', but give millions to others in other countrys starving what about your own country first. I cant believe people die for this country and when thier in need of help the best they get is the streets mainly.
Private school huh? Did they teach English? How about spelling? <grin>
KB9BVN
04-01-2008, 10:24 AM
George Carlin did a great bit about this. First, he talked about all the people who say that a fetus is a human life and needs to be protected. Then, he goes on to point out that as soon as that fetus is born, it deserves no more support, and can starve as far as those "right to lifers" are concerned. You guys that condemn the government's programs to help our young people, don't you see the absolute hypocrisy in you views? Are you saying that you just don't care that young people starve? These are people that are blameless and are at the mercy of so many forces, and are powerless to do anything about it? What's with your cold, hard-hearted, "hate the kids" attitudes? You're immoral, selfish, and hopelessy clueless about real life.
You're kidding right?
W8EFA
04-01-2008, 03:25 PM
So right you are. The Libs pushing this politically correct non-embarrassment crapola are seriously deluded -- like so many lefty-loons living in their fantasy world.
My high school junior is striving ever harder after making the honor roll. He wants to stay there -- especially after receiving college/university recruitment letters by the dozens, to include secular schools like Cornell, and excellent Jesuit schools like Creighton, and Gonzaga. Differentiation is a good thing!
Please reference a real instance where this is seriously being discussed. If you look at this idiot Blog, it is simply taking a comment someone might have made and making up a bunch of lies about a program that has no controversy and has been operating the same way for 30 years. Please reference a credible site that the Government is actually looking at implementing this. This is just some inane comment by some administrator.
Just another entertainer making a living off getting right wing, simpleton, joyless, judgmental, nut cases something to hate and their blood all stirred up over a non issue. NeoCons just love getting fired up over Flags, and Gays, and School prayer and other non issues while their illustrious leaders destroy our constitution, take away our freedoms, ruin our reputation in the world, triple the deficit and bankrupt the country economically and morally.
n2ize
04-01-2008, 03:41 PM
So right you are. The Libs pushing this politically correct non-embarrassment crapola are seriously deluded -- like so many lefty-loons living in their fantasy world.
You're the one living in the fantasy world. Perhaps thats why you've selected to isolate yourself from as much of the USA as possible. Most clear thinking Americans understand that providing school lunches is not communism but basic decency.
My high school junior is striving ever harder after making the honor roll. He wants to stay there -- especially after receiving college/university recruitment letters by the dozens, to include secular schools like Cornell, and excellent Jesuit schools like Creighton, and Gonzaga. Differentiation is a good thing![/quote]
So are millions of other kids. My neices (honor roll) are already getting recruitment letters from MIT, Caltech, Columbia, Fordham (Jesuit), Yeshiva, West Point (Military) and other top schools in the country. And guess what ? Plenty of non-honor roll students are getting recruitment letters from the same top schools.
You're the one living in the fantasy world. Perhaps thats why you've selected to isolate yourself from as much of the USA as possible. Most clear thinking Americans understand that providing school lunches is not communism but basic decency.
So are millions of other kids. My neices (honor roll) are already getting recruitment letters from MIT, Caltech, Columbia, Fordham (Jesuit), Yeshiva, West Point (Military) and other top schools in the country. And guess what ? Plenty of non-honor roll students are getting recruitment letters from the same top schools.[/QUOTE]
MIT and Caltech sending out recruitment shots in the dark to non-honor roll students? They must be getting hard up, eh? Too few foreigners being allowed in? Too few Americans making the grade? Besides the "embarrassment" of students not making the grade, the Libs have an over-the-top belief that kids' free lunches cause further embarrassment. We just can't have that!
Since when has Alaska distanced itself from the lesser-48? We are the 49th state of the Union. We have one of the highest concentrations of "gubment" employees in any state. We are are not "second class" by any means.
The insidious tactics of the Libs are plainly visible. The furtherance of Socialism/Communism disguised as good intentions; it's always for the children!
Good grief!
N4VGB
04-01-2008, 05:58 PM
Free school lunches in pubic (that's not a typo) school are a moot subject for me. My children were private schooled and it did indeed put a severe crimp on our family budget.
Perhaps a much easier cure for any embarrassment felt by any children who are on the free meal plan would be to make it administered via credit card just as the food stamp program was changed.
You can no longer tell the difference at the grocery store checkout between someone buying groceries with their normal credit card and someone on the food stamp program, all use credit cards that look the same.
Having free meals for all pubic (still not a typo) school students is a very large expense to all tax payers and many very wealthy people still have their children in pubic (surely you get it by now) scholl, believing it to be the politically correct thing to do.
Which would bring up the question of whether or not the poor were being served better by this idea or if it's just another plan of the elitist to place more financial burden on the middle class for their sake.
Which would bring up the question of whether or not the poor were being served better by this idea or if it's just another plan of the elitist to place more financial burden on the middle class for their sake.
Yep... take more hard-earned monies from middle-class Americans in order to feed ALL school children, whether the kids' parents can afford to pay for and supply nourishing meals for their kids, or not.
Yep-sure... What a concept! Promote ever-expanding, inefficient, and wasteful government programs, to save children's precious egos from embarrassment. It's always for the children! Soak the middle-class of ever more funds for burgeoning government inefficiencies -- build that bureaucracy! What a concept!
Remember... it's always for the Children!
Now, Johnny... go milk a cow for the children, and give away some free milk. Some kids will thank you for it.
Cheers.
n2ize
04-01-2008, 07:56 PM
Yep... take more hard-earned monies from middle-class Americans in order to feed ALL school children, whether the kids' parents can afford to pay for and supply nourishing meals for their kids, or not.
Yep-sure... What a concept! Promote ever-expanding, inefficient, and wasteful government programs, to save children's precious egos from embarrassment. It's always for the children! Soak the middle-class of ever more funds for burgeoning government inefficiencies -- build that bureaucracy! What a concept!
Remember... it's always for the Children!
Now, Johnny... go milk a cow for the children, and give away some free milk. Some kids will thank you for it.
Cheers.
Incidentally, I can tell that you know very little about the school lunch act.
n2ize
04-01-2008, 08:20 PM
MIT and Caltech sending out recruitment shots in the dark to non-honor roll students? They must be getting hard up, eh? Too few foreigners being allowed in? Too few Americans making the grade?
MIT (pretty much the top science and engineering school and research institute in the world) is certainly not hard up for enrollment. They remain extremely competetive. There are plenty of foreign and American students enrolled at MIT and they are certainly making the grade. The curriculum and the courses at MIT are extemely challenging and extremely thorough. Which is to be expected at a school which serves the worlds best and brightest. Courses at MIT require hard work...and lots of it. You don't "make the grade" at MIT you EARN it.
Besides the "embarrassment" of students not making the grade, the Libs have an over-the-top belief that kids' free lunches cause further embarrassment. We just can't have that!
Unlike that Medvid sissy gossiper who wrote that lame article that any Kindergarten child could have written 10x better there are real men who bothered to take a look at the school lunch program and how it was working within the walls of the schools. And yes, they determined that expanding the program to encompass more might serve to assure fewer kids skip meals and that more kids eat a balanced meal during the day.
The only complaint I'll make about the school lunch program is that the cuisine could stand some improvement. At least if it's anything like the way it was when I was in school. However, I think many districts did improve on the food quality both with regards to nutritional value and with regards to taste. Matter of fact I think they should expand the budget even more and hire some top quality French and Italian chefs.
In any event I'd rather see kids getting a decent lunch instead of getting sent to some corrupt war somewhere.
Since when has Alaska distanced itself from the lesser-48? We are the 49th state of the Union. We have one of the highest concentrations of "gubment" employees in any state. We are are not "second class" by any means.
Seems like by some of the things you write her that you like keeping a distance.
The insidious tactics of the Libs are plainly visible. The furtherance of Socialism/Communism disguised as good intentions; it's always for the children!
Good grief!
Yes indeed, the school lunch program was definately inspired by left wing radical hippie communists. Thats why this man was one of the more iinfluential hippie commies involved in encouraging the school lunch act...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_George_C._Marshall
n2ize
04-01-2008, 08:25 PM
With the huge successess of the US school lunch program and the great benefits it has had on so many Americans some push for expanding the program throughout the world.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3190/is_35_34/ai_65077402
By all means... let the Fed-rule Gub-ment take care of you and chill'en. Abdicate your responsibilities. It is what you do best, right? Only in NYC.........
Chow.
Oh, that ought to be cheap! I don't have any kids. Not even the type that I don't know about. Now about that welfare.. err... ENTITLEMENT that Alaskans get every year...
:D
N4VGB
04-01-2008, 08:35 PM
With the huge successess of the US school lunch program and the great benefits it has had on so many Americans some push for expanding the program throughout the world.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3190/is_35_34/ai_65077402
That's a bit over the top for a country that has severe financial problems at home, even the liberal mind can surely grasp that?
Kind of like someone living on puiblic assistance deciding to purchase a new Mercedes. :confused:
For some kids, the school lunch (as unappetizing as it might be) is the one and only "meal" they get in a day. Look at any inner city school district and you'll see what I mean. The parents are too busy buying junk food (or selling them to maintain the crack habit) with their food stamps to feed the kids properly. As a result, the kids grow up thinking a bag of chips = dinner.
n2ize
04-01-2008, 08:39 PM
Y
Yep-sure... What a concept! Promote ever-expanding, inefficient, and wasteful government programs, to save children's precious egos from embarrassment. It's always for the children! Soak the middle-class of ever more funds for burgeoning government inefficiencies -- build that bureaucracy! What a concept!
Actually if you are going to make statements you should try to make true ones. When you fail to draw distinctions and you lump too many different objects into a single proposition you are more likely to state falshoods than truths.
In reality the school lunch program has not been wasteful and has been one of the most successful programs enacted. It may better serve you to do some objective research on the history of the school lunch program rather than cheap poorly written blurbs written by challenged right wing talk wimps on ultra neoconservative gossip blogs.
n2ize
04-01-2008, 08:40 PM
That's a bit over the top for a country that has severe financial problems at home, even the liberal mind can surely grasp that?
Kind of like someone living on puiblic assistance deciding to purchase a new Mercedes. :confused:
It's still probably cheaper than wars. Especially corrupt ones.
Actually the liberal mind can grasp many concepts that the conservative mind cannot. Learning requires a liberation of the mind and well as liberal application of the powers of thought and reason.
N4VGB
04-01-2008, 08:42 PM
Oh, that ought to be cheap! I don't have any kids. Not even the type that I don't know about. Now about that welfare.. err... ENTITLEMENT that Alaskans get every year...
:D
Thank GOD! :D
Thank GOD! :D
Moving to Alaska Jethro? Ask Frozen Steve to introduce you to the Missus. I hear it's a whole ceremony and involves two guns and one bullet.
:D
N4VGB
04-01-2008, 08:55 PM
Moving to Alaska Jethro? Ask Frozen Steve to introduce you to the Missus. I hear it's a whole ceremony and involves two guns and one bullet.
:D
Winters are far too cold for me in Alaska.
Of course it wouldn't appeal to you at all either. A state so simple minded that it divides it's oil wealth with it's citizens, instead of finding ways to spend it all and steal more from it's citizens.
You and the lords of NY richly deserve each other! :D
Oh, that ought to be cheap! I don't have any kids. Not even the type that I don't know about. Now about that welfare.. err... ENTITLEMENT that Alaskans get every year...
:D
In Alaska, the great state of Alaska government has long held the belief that a portion of Alaska's subsurface wealth shall be shared equally with qualified state citizens for as long as fiscally possible. The state of Alaska has continued this tradition of service, and not squandered the now close to 30 billion dollars in this overwhelmingly popular program. It's a well-managed, ever-growing, and inflation-proofed perk for all deserving Alaskans.
The state of Alaska doesn't impose any sales or income tax. Rightfully, it shares it's oil royalties, through the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend, with it's Frozen Chosen -- deserving state citizens. Life here is grand.
73.
k8wpj
04-02-2008, 04:21 AM
If my 6-year old wants a hot school lunch, he has to pay $2.30. Obviously, He (we) do not "qualify" for reduced cost or "free lunches." Obviously, we're paying for the others' lunches through taxes -- more income redistribution.
I'd rather have my wife or I pack my kids' lunches; we know what goes into them -- healthier food for less cost. And most assuredly, they are packed with special, personal healthy treats and notes of love and encouragement.
Let's see the government take away this small act of attentive and abiding care and love for our "dear ones" away -- feeding our loved ones.
That'll be the day!
So, Do you protest transportation services, and special ed classes for the disabled kids, too?
Or, do you believe only your able bodied chilluns deserve an education?
k8wpj
04-02-2008, 04:27 AM
Ten Dolla'? That's probably what they cost for the "rich" people of NYC School District, right? It's no wonder NYC wants to have everyone eat their "manufactured meals" -- there's money to be made by some lucky, few, liberally corrupt politicians!
---
The reason I know the cost of hot lunch, is that my 6-year old asked to try one about two days ago -- inquiring for the first time this year.
Sorry, Johnny... My kids have their lunches lovingly packed each and every day by their PARENTS.
Toodles.
See, there you go again... First you whine about how much you can afford to pay for your kids lunches, then you bash someone else for living in a place with a higher cost of living, as if Alaska is the only place on this earth fit for habitation....
Just because you chose to live there, why are the rest of us such losers for not wanting to be that close to you?
I anxoiusly await another scintilating and well thought out reply from you Almighty One...
k8wpj
04-02-2008, 04:32 AM
Since when has Alaska distanced itself from the lesser-48? We are the 49th state of the Union.... We are are not "second class" by any means.
I can only wonder if they'll feel that way about themselves after you move again....
See, there you go again... First you whine about how much you can afford to pay for your kids lunches, then you bash someone else for living in a place with a higher cost of living, as if Alaska is the only place on this earth fit for habitation....
Just because you chose to live there, why are the rest of us such losers for not wanting to be that close to you?
I anxoiusly await another scintilating and well thought out reply from you Almighty One...
More venom from the peanut gallery. How delightful you are! I'm still waiting for you to concoct a sentence or two without glaring spelling errors; you are becoming so typical of many here.
Actually, if you look at states on-whole, Alaska has the 5th highest cost-of-living in the Nation. New Jersey, D.C. (not a state), Hawaii, and California have a higher cost-of-living. Like Hawaii, most everything must be shipped here. Hence, the high cost-of-living is built-in. Luckily, our high-paying oil industry and related jobs, civilian government plus 25% Cost-Of-Living Adjustment (COLA) positions, and growing high-tech industry opportunities, pay really, really well. Six-figure households are commonplace in the Anchorage and surrounding areas.
Yes, it's my choice to live here. Alaskans' usual self-determination, independence, fierce can-do spirit, common sense, helpfulness, and friendliness forever keep me a fan.
Reference: http://ded.mo.gov/researchandplanning/indicators/cost_of_living/index.stm
Toodles.
So, Do you protest transportation services, and special ed classes for the disabled kids, too?
Or, do you believe only your able bodied chilluns deserve an education?
I draw the line at the idea of free meals for all kids... for the reasons I've mentioned. It's ridiculous!
I also believe in and support school vouchers. If I wish to send my children to a competing school, public or private, my kids should have the right to attend these schools, with equal-for-all-students voucher amounts applied to any school's tuition costs. The differences, if any, made up by responsible parents.
Inter-school competition for students, as well as competition for student admission would be a good thing. I could see non-performing educators falling by the wayside, or actually getting off their collective duffs to present quality educational experiences for deserving students. This could be a win-win situation for all... making teachers, students, and administrators more responsible. Real competition is a capitalistic society is a wonderful thing.
Bring it on...
I can only wonder if they'll feel that way about themselves after you move again....
I'm not moving... the outlying communities, just outside of Anchorage purview, are my home base. I've invested in a home and land where their value is rising steadily -- not the wild speculation and bubbles found in the lesser-48. My house is up 13% in the last 4 years, is located in the fastest growing section of Alaska for many years running, and is perfectly positioned for an easy commute into Anchorage. If and when my high-tech line of work takes me to the lesser-48 for short-period contracting or consulting, so be it. My home is here. Choice is a wonderful thing.
The Anchorage housing market is saturated. There's little land left to build upon. Remaining land is being developed into high density dwellings, or is expected to go vertical. Folks are moving to the "Valley" where I live, just to find reasonable housing. Most want some land to go with their home, and a more rural quality of life not found in Anchorage. Choice is a wonderful thing.
n2ize
04-02-2008, 06:19 AM
Winters are far too cold for me in Alaska.
Of course it wouldn't appeal to you at all either. A state so simple minded that it divides it's oil wealth with it's citizens, instead of finding ways to spend it all and steal more from it's citizens.
You and the lords of NY richly deserve each other! :D
Few states can offer what New York offers it's residents. That is why so many people migrate to New York from all over the country. There is so much that appeals to so many. From it's temperate climate to it's geographical diversity...beaches and waterfronts to pristine rural wilderness regions, to the most presigious urban center in the world. Easy access to all the major transportation hubs making the entire world so easilly accessible. Superb educational opportunities with several of the nations top Universities and very close proximity to so many others. Not to mention cultural and ethnic diversity in so many areas from food to music to art to museams and cultural centers to entire neighborhoods. A major financial capital with vast and wide ranging employment opportuinities. On any typical evening I can come home from work, take the elevator or grand staircase to my apartment, relax while enjoying the panoramic view of the entire city out to and beyond the Hudson, East River and New York Harbor. Then, after grabbing an nice soothing shower and a change of clothes take a lady friend to any number of excellent resturants offering virtually any type or style of cuisine imaginable, afterwards take in a show (on or off Broadway) or a movie, afterwards stop at a sidewalk cafe for an esspresso or cappucino, followed up by a romantic walk along Park Avenue or Central park West (glamourous around Christmas time or any time) in the wee hours of the morning before heading home.
Life is good here.
Few states can offer what New York offers it's residents. That is why so many people migrate to New York from all over the country. There is so much that appeals to so many. From it's temperate climate to it's geographical diversity...beaches and waterfronts to pristine rural wilderness regions, to the most presigious urban center in the world. Easy access to all the major transportation hubs making the entire world so easilly accessible. Superb educational opportunities with several of the nations top Universities and very close proximity to so many others. Not to mention cultural and ethnic diversity in so many areas from food to music to art to museams and cultural centers to entire neighborhoods. A major financial capital with vast and wide ranging employment opportuinities. On any typical evening I can come home from work, take the elevator or grand staircase to my apartment, relax while enjoying the panoramic view of the entire city out to and beyond the Hudson, East River and New York Harbor. Then, after grabbing an nice soothing shower and a change of clothes take a lady friend to any number of excellent resturants offering virtually any type or style of cuisine imaginable, afterwards take in a show (on or off Broadway) or a movie, afterwards stop at a sidewalk cafe for an esspresso or cappucino, followed up by a romantic walk along Park Avenue or Central park West (glamourous around Christmas time or any time) in the wee hours of the morning before heading home.
Life is good here.
Actually, I believe you. But alas, it's not for me.
Actually, I believe you. But alas, it's not for me.
I agree completely. You are more than welcome to my share of any city. For me, the alure of complete darkness when the sun goes down and being able to acutally see stars is far more attractive. Hearing nothing but the wind in the trees and Canada geese honking overhead is a very close second.
Many accessible parts of Alaska offer areas completely devoid of light pollution. The Milky Way's band lights up the sky -- it's an awesome sight, virtually every star capable of being seen can be seen -- from horizon to horizon.
Being 50 miles outside of Anchorage, my home's light pollution is quite low. My son and I enjoy the stars and auroras on crisp cold nights while walking the dogs. Truly awesome!
N4PRT
04-03-2008, 12:28 AM
Back in the stone age when I went to school, we all brought our own lunches in paper bags or lunch boxes. Something must have been radically different, for there were no fat kids, no ADD kids, half the student body was not allergic to one thing or another, soda pop was verboten, and we had no need to be shown how to use condoms--we were too busy learning and having fun at recess.
Life here is grand.
73.
BTW, did they ever find all those people who disappeared on Good Friday, 1964? :cool: