• IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    If you want to look at this situation from an economic point of view … what’s cheaper?

    Pay a kids lunch every day for about 12-14 years … and for a growing kid, the price wouldn’t be that much, especially if you are paying in bulk amounts for hundreds or thousands of kids.

    or

    Don’t pay their lunch, let the parents go into debt, take the kids into foster care … now you as the government have to pay for legal expenses to take the kid away, expenses to have police and social service workers to do the work, foster expenses to house the kid and care for them (now you are having to pay for every single meal for them for years), give up the kid once they become of age and go out on their own after foster care as a disillusioned, angry and frustrated young man or woman who will more than likely end up on the street dealing drugs, crime or prostitution … who will then grow up causing or contributing to crime and increasing the costs of police, legal, emergency health care, security and penitentiary … and chances are they will have children who will end up at school not being able to pay for their lunch

    If you pay to help the kid when they are young, there is more of a chance they will grow up to be a contributing healthy member of society. If you don’t they will become a lifelong burden on society and cause endless expenses that will be far more money than any school lunches you could have bought when they were ten years old.

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      If you pay to help the kid when they are young, there is more of a chance they will grow up to be a contributing healthy member of society.

      Those in power do not want a contributing healthy member of society. They want malleable, docile workers that will do as they’re told and not challenge the system.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        I disagree. What they want is to threaten those they see as inferior. It’s a power trip borne from an ideological feedback loop. Sense and goals are secondary to “poor people need to take responsibility for feeding their children, I’m not paying for their decisions”.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t even want to look at it from that perspective. As civilized society we need to feed and educate children. All of them. Economics can be figured out for sure, but if this is a priority we can certainly make it happen.