December 11th, 2012 at 12:03 pm
Would all the helpful people wake up early in the morning and go with a donation of a dozen eggs and loaf of bread and butter, or a packet of weetbix and a tin of fruit with a carton of milk or packet of porridge.
Whether planned the day before or not,
Then knock on the door of a supposed poor family house, announcing that they would love to share a breakfast, just break out the pots and pans, plates and cutlery, enlist any young helpers and or parent so that the family all learns how to start the day with a breakfast. Afterward all dishes are done and then off to school and work.
Then knock on the door of a supposed poor family house, announcing that they would love to share a breakfast, just break out the pots and pans, plates and cutlery, enlist any young helpers and or parent so that the family all learns how to start the day with a breakfast. Afterward all dishes are done and then off to school and work.
No judgement of how things are, just get done what is needed during that hour. Answer any queries to be helpful with out pushing things.
That way the kids and parents can see how to do things, recognize what may be bought in a shop, and eventually phase over to doing it themselves. If they are not interested then move on to where there is a better attitude and response. They have made their choice.
Why can not all these helpful people put their important time, and really just a helpful small change contribution. It is the personal touch that is so important, that can be inspirational and motivational.
Surely this would be much better than “I am the man from the government and I am here to help you” with social welfare and other people’s money. Just how generous are others who then feel so good demanding other people’s money to give away on hare brained schemes after they heavily clipped (salaried) the system.
simpleton1 (85) Says:
May 3rd, 2013 at 1:40 pm
Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/05/07/free_breakfasts_another_destructive_progressive_idea_118274.html#ixzz2SnBWYNub
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter
simpleton1 (85) Says:
May 21st, 2013 at 2:15 pm
simpleton1 (85) Says:
May 3rd, 2013 at 1:40 pm
I posted this on December 11th, 2012 at 12:03 pm and I feel bears repeating and I have added a few bits and pieces.
Would all the helpful people wake up early in the morning and go with a donation of a dozen eggs and loaf of bread and butter, or a packet of weetbix and a tin of fruit with a carton of milk or packet of porridge. For helping to make lunch maybe some marmite, peanut butter jam.
I am sure others can think of maybe even better budget alternatives.
I am sure others can think of maybe even better budget alternatives.
Whether planned/consulted the day before or not,
Then knock on the door of a supposed poor family house, announcing that they would love to share a breakfast, just break out the pots and pans, plates and cutlery, enlist any young helpers and or parent so that the family all learns how to start the day with a breakfast. Then bread buttered and spreads ready for lunch.
Afterward all dishes are done and then all off to school and work.
Then knock on the door of a supposed poor family house, announcing that they would love to share a breakfast, just break out the pots and pans, plates and cutlery, enlist any young helpers and or parent so that the family all learns how to start the day with a breakfast. Then bread buttered and spreads ready for lunch.
Afterward all dishes are done and then all off to school and work.
No judgement of how things are, just get done what is needed during that hour. Answer any queries to be helpful with out pushing things.
That way the kids and parents can see how to do things, recognize what may be bought in a shop, and eventually phase over to doing it themselves. If they are not interested then move on to where there is a better attitude and response. They have made their choice.
That way the kids and parents can see how to do things, recognize what may be bought in a shop, and eventually phase over to doing it themselves. If they are not interested then move on to where there is a better attitude and response. They have made their choice.
That was how families used to do things, older brothers and sisters helping, and so when the younger ones became older they were also expected to be helpful. Sure in this day and age late night tv/ computers/games may conflict, but it is a life learning things of discipline, losses/ rewards and taking responsibility.
Why can not all these helpful people put their important time, and really just a helpful small change contribution. It is the personal touch that is so important, that can be inspirational and motivational.
Sure some changes/tweaks to my initial concept, like a barbecue out front to do a cook up, and then the helped ones bring out plates cutlery etc.
What has to happen is the ones being helped have to take some responsibility, and with the new knowledge increasing responsibility and respect for themselves and others.
Sure some changes/tweaks to my initial concept, like a barbecue out front to do a cook up, and then the helped ones bring out plates cutlery etc.
What has to happen is the ones being helped have to take some responsibility, and with the new knowledge increasing responsibility and respect for themselves and others.
Surely this would be much better than “I am the man from the government and I am here to help you” with social welfare and other people’s money. Just how generous are others who then feel so good demanding other people’s money to give away on hare brained schemes after they heavily clipped (salaried) other peoples taxes.
New school building for kitchens cafeterias etc and then staffed and a major bureaucracy that needs an administration and budgets etc as it builds up another empire. And what will the children learn ? ? ?
New school building for kitchens cafeterias etc and then staffed and a major bureaucracy that needs an administration and budgets etc as it builds up another empire. And what will the children learn ? ? ?
Free Breakfasts: Another Destructive Liberal Idea
Email
Print
The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) announced last week that it will discontinue the free school breakfast plan it initiated last year.
It was funded by the LAUSD and the nonprofit Los Angeles Fund for Public Education, whose goal is to raise the number who participate to about 450,000 students (out of a total of 645,000 in the entire district).
If you go to the fund's website (lafund.org), you are greeted with these messages: "Learn to dream" (in English and in Spanish) and "Imagine your life without limits." These are essentially meaningless messages. But, as we shall see, the fund's breakfast program is not only meaningless; it is quite destructive.
The reasons for the announced cancellation were that the program had drawn rodents and insects into classrooms, and that classroom learning time was being wasted by students eating for long periods in class.
But the rodents, insects and disruption of class learning time are nothing in terms of destructiveness compared to the free breakfast itself.
First, the program was created to solve a problem that does not exist.
It is inconceivable that there are five, let alone 200,000 or the projected 450,000, homes in Los Angeles that cannot afford breakfast for their child. A nutritious breakfast can be had for less than a dollar. For examples, go to this site, which lists five "Breakfast Ideas for a Buck."
Second, it both enables and encourages irresponsible, disinterested and incompetent parenting. Given how inexpensive breakfast can be (not to mention the myriad public and private programs that provide food for poor households), any home that cannot provide its child with breakfast demands a visit from child protective services. Any parent who cannot give a child breakfast is not too poor; he or she is too incapable of being, or too irresponsible to be, a competent parent.
Third, even where decent parents are involved, free breakfasts at school weaken the parent-child bond. Hundreds of thousands of parents who are able and happy to provide their child with breakfast have accepted the offer -- because anything free is too enticing for an increasing number of Americans. But what they have done is made the proverbial deal with the devil. They have traded in one of the most fundamental definitions of parenthood -- providing one's children with food -- for a dollar and for a little less work as a parent. As a result, these parents become less of a parent to their children.
And fourth, the free breakfast profoundly weakens young people's character. When you grow up learning to depend on the state, you will almost inevitably -- even understandably -- assume that the state will take care of you. And you will grow up also assuming -- as do Europeans, who give far less charity than Americans for this very reason -- that the state will take care of your fellow citizens, including your own children.
These are the ways in which the left has damaged children and families through free school breakfasts.
But it gets worse. "Canceling" the program does not mean ending it.
Remember, the program is not being canceled because of its destructive effects on students and family life. The reasons it is being canceled are that rodents and insects infest classrooms, and that classroom learning time is wasted while the children stretch out breakfast eating time.
Therefore, the program is being shifted to the schools' cafeterias. The public employee unions, which govern the state of California and the city of Los Angeles, have demanded that the program be shifted from the classroom to the school cafeterias so as to employ more cafeteria workers.
Virtually everything the left touches is either immediately or eventually harmed. The free breakfast program is only one, albeit a particularly dramatic, example.
Why, then, do progressives advocate it? Because it meets three essential characteristics of the left wing: It strengthens the state; it has governmental authority replace parental authority; and perhaps most importantly, it makes progressives feel good about themselves. The overriding concern of the left is not whether a program does good. It is whether it feels good.
Glossary:Material deprivation
(Redirected from Glossary:Severe material deprivation rate) http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Glossary:Severe_material_deprivation_rate
Material deprivation refers to a state of economic strain and durables strain, defined as the enforced inability (rather than the choice not to do so) to pay unexpected expenses, afford a one-week annual holiday away from home, a meal involving meat, chicken or fish every second day, the adequate heating of a dwelling, durable goods like a washing machine, colour television, telephone or car, being confronted with payment arrears (mortgage or rent, utility bills, hire purchase instalments or other loan payments).
The material deprivation rate is an indicator in EU-SILC that expresses the inability to afford some items considered by most people to be desirable or even necessary to lead an adequate life. The indicator distinguishes between individuals who cannot afford a certain good or service, and those who do not have this good or service for another reason, e.g. because they do not want or do not need it.
The indicator adopted by the Social protection committee measures the percentage of the population that cannot afford at least three of the following nine items:
- to pay their rent, mortgage or utility bills;
- to keep their home adequately warm;
- to face unexpected expenses;
- to eat meat or proteins regularly;
- to go on holiday;
- a television set;
- a washing machine;
- a car;
- a telephone.
Severe material deprivation rate is defined as the enforced inability to pay for at least four of the above-mentioned items.
Related indicators
Statistical data
Source
Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/05/07/free_breakfasts_another_destructive_progressive_idea_118274.html#ixzz2SnBWYNub
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter
simpleton1 (85) Says:
May 21st, 2013 at 2:15 pm
Those who want “Food in Schools”
You take some breakfast and lunch products to a struggling house saying you want to share.
Help the “family” to prepare and cook breakfast and prepare lunch, cleanup, and be out of the house onto school and work.
A fortnight of this should set that family up. Then go onto the next family. Check back about once a month or so.
That way the helped and the helpers will learn, and become motivated. Sure there may be mistakes and understanding but it will be better to be learning right at the cliff face.
After all it is not always what you know but who you know.
After all it is not always what you know but who you know.
This personal approach could be fine tuned to make it more adaptable and workable, for your time, energy and money, instead of demanding taxes with menaces from others.
The principle of helping your neighbour is being hidden with entitlements taxes rights and demands.
Part of the idea of sharing breakfasts/lunch is from having a “pot luck dinners” initially, for the street where there is an invitation to all with consideration to numbers. That is where every one works things out where their strengths lie with their contributions of different dishes.
Of course conversation, learning with respect goes on, with out being overwhelming or judgmental. That is so that it will be happy to be repeated.
At the end a conclusion of strengths and weaknesses is drawn and then to when and where the next pot luck will be.
At the end a conclusion of strengths and weaknesses is drawn and then to when and where the next pot luck will be.
If sharing breakfasts can be made a success others will be drawn to it and so others may freely contribute and voluntarily help also if they wish.
Sure this seems to be too simple and will need a lot more thought to make it more workable.
Many others have breakfast meetings, just look at “after-budget breakfasts” and other business meetings and they freely pay to be there. A bit expensive for my tastes though. More satisfying to share what we have and when we can.
I think it is a part of mixing with people, understanding, motivating, learning, prioritizing things in life and families. Can Government agencies really do this when they just treat you as a so called “client/customer” or really just a resource and a number for their empire.
Start small. live and learn and build toward success even if small. May be some more challenging invites, just do not invite more than your system can cope with. There will be mistakes, errors, mis-communications. mis-understandings, and so always learning.
I am sure others can easily find pitfalls in these ideas, which is ok if you can also sincerely seek answers to those problems. The answers are with us. Not in a wish list put upon a government
Better to be a stepping stone than a stumbling block.
Better to be a stepping stone than a stumbling block.
Featured Guest Review: Niall Ferguson on Coming Apart
Niall Ferguson is professor of history at Harvard, a fellow of the Hoover Institution and the author of numerous books, most recently Civilization: The West and the Rest and The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World.
Since the advent of "Occupy Wall Street," there has been a tendency to assume that only the Left worries about inequality in America. Charles Murray's Coming Apart shows that conservatives, too, need to be concerned.
This is an immensely important and utterly gripping book. It deserves to be as much talked about as Murray's most controversial work (co-authored with Richard J. Herrnstein), The Bell Curve. Quite unjustly, that book was anathematized as "racist" because it pointed out that, on average, African-Americans had lower IQ scores than white Americans.
No doubt the same politically correct critics will complain about this book, because it is almost entirely devoted to the problem of social polarization within "white America." They will have to ignore one ofComing Apart's most surprising findings: that race is not a significant determinant of social polarization in today's America. It is class that really matters.
Murray meticulously chronicles and measures the emergence of two wholly distinct classes: a new upper class, first identified in The Bell Curve as "the cognitive elite," and a new "lower class," which he is too polite to give a name. And he vividly localizes his argument by imagining two emblematic communities: Belmont, where everyone has at least one college degree, and Fishtown, where no one has any. (Read: Tonyville and Trashtown.)
The key point is that the four great social trends of the past half-century--the decline of marriage, of the work ethic, of respect for the law and of religious observance--have affected Fishtown much more than Belmont. As a consequence, the traditional bonds of civil society have atrophied in Fishtown. And that, Murray concludes, is why people there are so very unhappy--and dysfunctional.
What can be done to reunite these two classes? Murray is dismissive of the standard liberal prescription of higher taxes on the rich and higher spending on the poor. As he points out, there could hardly be a worse moment to try to import the European welfare state, just as that system suffers fiscal collapse in its continent of origin.
What the country needs is not an even larger federal government but a kind of civic Great Awakening--a return to the republic's original foundations of family, vocation, community, and faith.
Coming Apart is a model of rigorous sociological inquiry, yet it is also highly readable. After the chronic incoherence of Occupy Wall Street, it comes as a blessed relief. Every American should read it. Too bad only the cognitive elite will.
simpleton1 (94) Says:
June 1st, 2013 at 11:33 am
simpleton1 (94) Says:
June 1st, 2013 at 11:33 am
Thanks Scrubone,
I know where you’re coming from, but the problem is that those people don’t want your help
and I am aware only to well aware of that.
Still it is possible to reach some, that are genuine in needing a hand up and do not know how to put it altogether. Not that there is one easily doable answer.
I have worked in different industries that have a sort of “gang structure”that often can be disparaged. Some however have got out of the “piss it all against the wall” particularly when they were young. Where some one has got a good idea and it is successful it gets talked over at smoko and lunch and the point is, if I can do it you can to. They unwittingly sow the ideas but importantly mention the contacts and the knowledge needed. Surprisingly the whole group uplifts and every one who becomes involved with them in their own way get things sorted. Others just continue hopelessly in a downward spiral. Sure it is not roses all the way and mistakes are made, but progress in the group also continues, and importantly it is has been done mostly in their own way.
I just think if it is possible to kick start some, so other friends, neighbours , family may see the way if they so want.
Government and social agencies are just expensive band aids, and often do not relate. Even my age, class also does not relate, so often try to point out where others of the same may be doing ok. I just look at the commitment as being just a fortnight, so as not to be overwhelming nor to burn out. Also to move on if they can not help, though some of the kids may learn some pointers.
Nor do I want helpers to become a bunch of nosy parkers, leave your judgements outside.
Still possibly a lot more to think about and I am sure others may have more better ideas of how to make a part of the idea more workable.
No comments:
Post a Comment