Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Free or reduced lunch for children of illegal immigrants

Merlocke · 03-14-2008, 11:16 PM

the pattern of success is a set of questions: who what what how.

Who can help with this problem?
We can. We can make the decision to either help the present and futures of these children to make them a productive member of society, or we can make the decision to let them starve, force them to steal food to survive, and keep a mindset of survival versus a chance to get an education and move up in the world. Last I checked, progress is only made in the present to affect the future result. If that is only attainable by feeding the children that require it - then it's up to us to make that choice.

What is the problem?
This kind of depends on the person asking it. Identifying the issue could be simply feeding a needy child, to are we making the future society a better place or not? It could also simply stem from the fact that people are angry that non-working illegal immigrants are just sending their children to school to be fed. That may be a reality, but look at the other side of the coin. Not feeding them will force them into the direction of crime. What is the true price of our actions or inactions?

What can we do about the situation?
Find methods to attain positive solutions to benefit all parties as much as possible. In the end, it's about benefiting society as a whole. The whole purpose of government and taxes is to create an environment for businesses and people to thrive. Lowering potential future crime and allowing the other students in the class to focus seems to be a worthy goal in my books.

Lastly - How are we going to accomplish our end result?
The war is only existing between your ears. Either you make peace with the fact that you have to feed a hungry child for the chance to lower crime, or you have to understand that a hungry child going without food would increase the chances of crime occurring - either by the child, or the parents trying to feed the child. The other side is that the future other children from families not as much in need are taking schooling alongside the needy ones. Disruptions breaking the attention cycles and stopping the classes reduce the chances for any of the other children from learning what they're supposed to be learning. Not that the education system is fantastic (that's another story) but that bad is better than nothing at all. Why not attempt to reduce the "bad"?

-=-

You cannot truly be at peace until you've experienced true violence. Balance is something only attained after visiting or at least acknowledging both ends of the spectrum. What difference is there between electing feeding over starving? There must be a way to preserve and maintain the natural balance of good (feeding) and evil (jealousy) by simply standing back and focusing on the result of the intentions that turn into behaviors and end up as results.

03-14-2008, 11:16 PM	#39 (permalink)
Merlocke Location: Canada	the pattern of success is a set of questions: who what what how. Who can help with this problem? We can. We can make the decision to either help the present and futures of these children to make them a productive member of society, or we can make the decision to let them starve, force them to steal food to survive, and keep a mindset of survival versus a chance to get an education and move up in the world. Last I checked, progress is only made in the present to affect the future result. If that is only attainable by feeding the children that require it - then it's up to us to make that choice. What is the problem? This kind of depends on the person asking it. Identifying the issue could be simply feeding a needy child, to are we making the future society a better place or not? It could also simply stem from the fact that people are angry that non-working illegal immigrants are just sending their children to school to be fed. That may be a reality, but look at the other side of the coin. Not feeding them will force them into the direction of crime. What is the true price of our actions or inactions? What can we do about the situation? Find methods to attain positive solutions to benefit all parties as much as possible. In the end, it's about benefiting society as a whole. The whole purpose of government and taxes is to create an environment for businesses and people to thrive. Lowering potential future crime and allowing the other students in the class to focus seems to be a worthy goal in my books. Lastly - How are we going to accomplish our end result? The war is only existing between your ears. Either you make peace with the fact that you have to feed a hungry child for the chance to lower crime, or you have to understand that a hungry child going without food would increase the chances of crime occurring - either by the child, or the parents trying to feed the child. The other side is that the future other children from families not as much in need are taking schooling alongside the needy ones. Disruptions breaking the attention cycles and stopping the classes reduce the chances for any of the other children from learning what they're supposed to be learning. Not that the education system is fantastic (that's another story) but that bad is better than nothing at all. Why not attempt to reduce the "bad"? -=- You cannot truly be at peace until you've experienced true violence. Balance is something only attained after visiting or at least acknowledging both ends of the spectrum. What difference is there between electing feeding over starving? There must be a way to preserve and maintain the natural balance of good (feeding) and evil (jealousy) by simply standing back and focusing on the result of the intentions that turn into behaviors and end up as results. __________________ -=[ Merlocke ]=-