Free or reduced lunch for children of illegal immigrants

[Miss Mango]

Part of me feels thinks dont take it out on the children.

But...

then the government should also be dealing the parents of these kids and taxing them on the money they are sending home to help pay for it.

Why should everybody else have to take responsibilty for these kids because their parents feel as though they are somehow entitled to do whatever the hell they want while they are here illegally? Can I do that to? Move out of the country then sneak back in so we dont have pay taxes and free load off the system?

[allaboutmusic]

Tilted Politics maybe?

[ratbastid]

Whatever forum this lands in...

I say, feed the kids. There are WAY bigger and more expensive fish to fry in the Immigration debate.

Also, I just have to take issue with this: have you ever MET any illegal immigrants? I have. I've never seen a less "entitled to do whatever the hell they want" group of people. They're damn grateful to be here, and they WANT to be complying with the law--not just for fear of deportation, but because for the most part they're good people.

Who we get immigrating into this country are the hard-working, noble, often brilliant and talented members of other countries' societies. They end up in what we consider menial jobs, but you've got to understand, if you see the whole situation that has them here, that they're very likely feeding families back home, and they're the one who took on moving to a foreign country to have their family have that opportunity. In my book, that's worth acknowledging, because it TAKES something for a person to do that, and not everybody would do that.

The whole immigration system is badly broken. The part that's broken at a sociological level is the way we turn these amazing, generous, hard-working human beings into human cockroaches, we have their very presence disgust us and be a problem we have to solve. It breaks my heart, quite frankly. It's the perfect storm of racism and classism all rolled up into one big nasty, self-righteous position.

"So come in legally," you might say. Fair enough. I didn't say I like the way it currently works. What I don't like is the way we treat "illegals" like sub-humans when, frankly, they've got a hell of a lot more gumption than most of us keyboard-jockeys.

Mango: I've gone on a rant here that starts from what you said but goes beyond it. I'm not pointing any of this specifically back at you, so please don't take this personally--although I am interested in shaking people's thinking up on this issue, so if your thinking is shook up, then great.

[The_Jazz]

If you're going to educate them (and you should), then feed them too. Any teacher will tell you that a hungry child has a harder time paying attention and is more disruptive. That's why there are free and reduced lunch and breakfast programs in the first place. Many children of citizens come to school hungry and get their only filling, nutrious meal of the day. It allows all the other children at the school to learn better as a result.

It's one government program that shows hard and fast results.

[Baraka_Guru]

I wouldn't make the assumption that the goal of illegal immigrants is to be freeloaders.

And the bottom line? Children shouldn't starve. Nationality doesn't matter.

[PonyPotato]

"Punishing" people through their children is unethical. Many illegal immigrants DO pay taxes because it will help them eventually gain citizenship. How about sales taxes? State taxes usually fund the majority of programs like this, they are not ever paid for entirely by the federal government.

[Xazy]

I have no problem paying for the kids of illegal immigrants that PAY their taxes.

[Ustwo]

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

It's one government program that shows hard and fast results.

What are these hard and fast results?

That the children get fed or that they grow up to be more productive members of society because the state took over the obligation of feeding them from their parents?

I'd honestly like to know. If giving these kids food at other peoples expense does in fact turn them into better citizens I may well be for it, but if the end result is the same as children who didn't get a free lunch program than its just forcing tax payers to feed someone else's children.

Common sense would say it should help, but because it sounds good doesn't mean it really does anything.

[The_Jazz]

Ustwo, you obviously glossed over the rest of my post. Hungry kids are disruptive kids. You're a parent; you know this. Should I prove to you that boys have a penis and girls have a vagina, too?

This isn't about turning anyone into better citizens. This is about keeping the classroom calm.

I view this as an argument completely separate from whether or not minor illegal aliens should be educated. This is about whether or not they should get a good meal if they are.

[Miss Mango]

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Whatever forum this lands in...

I say, feed the kids. There are WAY bigger and more expensive fish to fry in the Immigration debate.

Also, I just have to take issue with this: have you ever MET any illegal immigrants? I have. I\'ve never seen a less \"entitled to do whatever the hell they want\" group of people. They\'re damn grateful to be here, and they WANT to be complying with the law--not just for fear of deportation, but because for the most part they\'re good people.

Who we get immigrating into this country are the hard-working, noble, often brilliant and talented members of other countries\' societies. They end up in what we consider menial jobs, but you\'ve got to understand, if you see the whole situation that has them here, that they\'re very likely feeding families back home, and they\'re the one who took on moving to a foreign country to have their family have that opportunity. In my book, that\'s worth acknowledging, because it TAKES something for a person to do that, and not everybody would do that.

The whole immigration system is badly broken. The part that\'s broken at a sociological level is the way we turn these amazing, generous, hard-working human beings into human cockroaches, we have their very presence disgust us and be a problem we have to solve. It breaks my heart, quite frankly. It\'s the perfect storm of racism and classism all rolled up into one big nasty, self-righteous position.

\"So come in legally,\" you might say. Fair enough. I didn\'t say I like the way it currently works. What I don\'t like is the way we treat \"illegals\" like sub-humans when, frankly, they\'ve got a hell of a lot more gumption than most of us keyboard-jockeys.

Mango: I\'ve gone on a rant here that starts from what you said but goes beyond it. I\'m not pointing any of this specifically back at you, so please don\'t take this personally--although I am interested in shaking people\'s thinking up on this issue, so if your thinking is shook up, then great.

That\'s nice, but you avoided the question.

Why should everybody take responsibilty for illegal immigrants children? Are these people somehow void of all personal responsibilty? Keyboard jockey or not, I\'ve posed this question that feel the same way you do and they couldn\'t give me a answer either.

Not so far from here there is a married couple that owns a liquor store. These people are legal immigrants from Iraq. They work hard, pay their taxes and run a honest business. They speak english better than people that are native US citizens, have manners and don\'t expect people to out of their way just because they migrated here.

It\'s always interesting to see how people react to this couple post 9-11. While I\'ve never witnessed customers giving them a hard time, they do get questionable looks as if they themselves are responsible to the mess that is going on right now on their home country..

So while you wag your finger and give me lectures about being racist, I think you should hang around legal immigrants that take alot of shit just because they come from the former home Saddam.

[snowy]

I have actually worked in an elementary school where illegal immigrants were among the registered students.

Guess what? They're just kids. Regular kids. Regular kids whose parents work so much at low-paying jobs that it's often hard to find time or money to put food on the table.

For many of these kids, the meal they receive at school is the ONLY meal they get all day.

Regardless of how they're in this country, they should be fed and educated. If we want these people to truly improve their living situations, and get out of poverty--regardless of whether it's here or in Mexico--those children should be taken care of. Furthermore, a LOT of kids of illegals are LEGAL American citizens. So don't presume that just because you see a kid with brown skin that he must be illegal, and don't presume that because his English is shaky and his mom doesn't speak it at all he must be illegal.

Could you really say no to feeding a child if it came down to it? I don't think so.

And don't get me started on the tangled mess that is the free/reduced lunch program. It's basically an extension of the farm bill, and is meant to subsidize farmers as much as it's meant to feed kids. Parental tax money is really, really irrelevant here, as the income requirements for free lunch in particular mean that the parents typically are so poor as to not pay taxes in the first place--regardless of citizenship.

[Ustwo]

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

Ustwo, you obviously glossed over the rest of my post. Hungry kids are disruptive kids. You're a parent; you know this. Should I prove to you that boys have a penis and girls have a vagina, too?

This isn't about turning anyone into better citizens. This is about keeping the classroom calm.

I view this as an argument completely separate from whether or not minor illegal aliens should be educated. This is about whether or not they should get a good meal if they are.

Oh I assumed by results I thought you meant 'good investment of taxpayer money'

I thought the rest of your post was just additional information.

So by hard and fast results, you mean hungry kids are easier for teachers to control, nothing beyond that.

So basically we feed other peoples children at our expense so they are not disruptive in class.

I have to wonder, if they were not fed this free lunch, would their parents feed them at all, or have they just come to expect it and as such ignore their responsibilities as parents since the taxpayers are covering it.

But thanks for that penis/vagina thing, it clears up a LOT of questions I had.

[The_Jazz]

At it's essence, that's my arguement: well-fed kids are easier to control. Some parents don't have the ability/knowledge/intelligence to feed their kids well. Those kids then disrupt class. I sat next to those kids in school before and after they introduced free breakfast in elementary school. I still remember how much quieter class got after that change.

So, yes, I advocate putting poor kids and children of illegal immigrants into food comas to make them more docile. This will help not just those kids but all the kids around them that have to sit next to little John/Jane/Jorge while he throws a tempertantrum because his blood sugar is low after eating mayonaise sandwiches the night before. Small investment, big return since the ENTIRE class benefits, not just the kid getting the food.

In re your comment about the parents - who knows? Each family is different. I'm sure your Evil Republican Personna that you like to project will assume all parents will stop feeding their kids because of this. I'm sure that would be the case for some. But "some" is not "all" or even "most". Purposefully not feeding your kids seems like complete abdication of parental responsibility to me, and I don't think that there's any reason to see that happening more among the poor than the middle or upper class.

[ratbastid]

Originally Posted by Miss Mango

That\'s nice, but you avoided the question.

I didn't, actually. I said we should feed those kids. That's an answer. You avoided my response, though.

Originally Posted by Miss Mango

Why should everybody take responsibilty for illegal immigrants children? Are these people somehow void of all personal responsibilty?

Well, given they're the ones who left their homes and came to another country to work their ASSES off cleaning houses and gardening for rich white people to feed their families back home, I guarantee you they're not void of all personal responsibility. See, that's the kind of thinking I have a real problem with--you're interacting with the phenomenon of immigration as if you were under invasion. You're not looking at the immigrant's situation.

The whole thing sucks, okay? But dealing with it by clamping down on them once they're here is like putting makeup on skin cancer. It looks like we're doing something, but the world stays out of whack and the economic forces behind immigration charge along completely uninterrupted.

Originally Posted by Miss Mango

So while you wag your finger and give me lectures about being racist, I think you should hang around legal immigrants that take alot of shit just because they come from the former home Saddam.

Yeah, well, I agree that what we do to legal immigrants is pretty appalling, especially since 9/11. What we do to illegals is downright inhuman.

I also request you re-read my last paragraph above. None of what I wrote above was meant to be about you personally.

[Willravel]

We should feed them because they're hungry. I don't know why it's more complicated than that. It's the right thing to do.

[Xazy]

Originally Posted by willravel

We should feed them because they're hungry. I don't know why it's more complicated than that. It's the right thing to do.

I agree and disagree. There are tons of charity organizations that help people, but why is it the taxpayer requirement to pay for them? It sounds heartless, I admit. I give 10% of the money I make to charity including some for helping to feed people who can not afford food. That is my choice that I am making, but I would not require others to make that same commitment, not all others can, nor should they be required to spend their money doing so.

[girldetective]

UsTwo - "So basically we feed other peoples children at our expense so they are not disruptive in class."

Yes, thats right. What you are really paying for is your own child's ease to learn in a less disruptive classroom and to have more opportunity to interact with their teacher and peers in a meaningful way, isnt it? And to set an example to your own child that helping another is a good thing, even if its only providing lunch. If your child had a friend over your house at lunch time, would you deny them a sandwich and milk, or would you ask them to brown bag it at your house?

[The_Jazz]

Originally Posted by namako

UsTwo - "So basically we feed other peoples children at our expense so they are not disruptive in class."

Yes, thats right. What you are really paying for is your own child's ease to learn in a less disruptive classroom and to have more opportunity to interact with their teacher and peers in a meaningful way, isnt it? And to set an example to your own child that helping another is a good thing, even if its only providing lunch. If your child had a friend over your house at lunch time, would you deny them a sandwich and milk, or would you ask them to brown bag it at your house?

Ustwo's kids don't have friends. They have co-conspirators. It goes with the territory.

[girldetective]

Of course you're right. The brown bags could be a training vehicle for the locked briefcases they'll be packing later.

[UKking]

I think that any child with parents in low-paying jobs should be (and are in England, I believe) entitled to a free meal at school, regardless of whether or not they are illegal immigrants or not...

[Strange Famous]

I never can understand white Americans using the term "immigrant" as if it means something different to what they are to them.

If you are talking about a tax evader, thats a different question... but everyone who isnt an "Indian" is an immigrant in America.

[Baraka_Guru]

Originally Posted by Strange Famous

I never can understand white Americans using the term "immigrant" as if it means something different to what they are to them.

If you are talking about a tax evader, thats a different question... but everyone who isnt an "Indian" is an immigrant in America.

Your first point is a good one, but your second point is only partly true. "America" is the state established by former British (i.e. White) colonies. Your point does, however, bring up another issue: Should the American government be doing more to "feed" (i.e. help out) impoverished First Nations people as well?

[Strange Famous]

Well... I dont want to steer the thread away from the OP's intention - so I think I should say my belief on that question.

I believe the state should provide every school child with one solid and healthy meal a day, and I dont really care who the kid's parents are or what they did... if they came in the country illegally, if they deal drugs, if they cheat, if they are anything else... I would give ever kid a cheap, plain, and hearty meal once a day and I would fund this with taxation. It costs about 80 cents per kid per day to do this.

As for the Indians, the Natives Americans, the First Nation people... I personally believe that the least that should be granted to these people is what was promised to them as long as water runs and grass grows.

[StellaLuna]

Not quoting anyone here because I don't want to come across as picking on any particular person...
But you're already paying for them. Kids of illegal immigrants, as long as they were born here OR meet certain other exemptions, are getting food stamps. I process those cases every day. I get mad about feeding the parents, but kids are thrown or pulled into these situations. It's not a child's fault that mommy and daddy live somewhere they aren't "supposed to live." I don't mind feeding those children.

And just to play devil's advocate... not every child getting free and reduced lunches belongs to an "illegal" family. Why stop there? Why not just stop the program altogether? Let's not feed the kids of any family that can't manage to feed themselves. Dad's a drunk and quit his job? Oh, well! Mom whores herself out to pay the electric bill? Sucks to be you, kid. Grandma raises you on her tiny social security check because Mom and Dad couldn't hack it, and she can't meet rent or feed you? Meh.

The question I think you should be asking yourself is what makes it so much more difficult to feed kids born to illegal immigrants who are currently in a shitty situation, as opposed to feeding kids who are citizens and parents either can't or won't make it in a society that requires cash for food?

[MSD]

Illegal immigrants pay billions of dollars in taxes per year because so many obtain fake social security numbers to be able to work. They don't file tax returns for obvious reasons, so they don't get any of it back.

On a higher level than the question of whether it is right to give benefits to the children of illegals is the immigration issue itself. I maintain my position that the proper way to go about things is to adopt a liberal immigration policy of checking out those who wish to enter the US and allowing anyone who is not a wanted criminal or known terrorist to become a resident. Therefore I feel that rules penalizing illegal immigrants who are otherwise law-abiding are unethical and should not be in place.

[debaser]

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

...boys have a penis and girls have a vagina...

What the FUCK!?!

[aberkok]

Yeah... I don't give a crap about where a kid comes from. If he's hungry, I'll feed him.

[dc_dux]

Originally Posted by aberkok

Yeah... I don't give a crap about where a kid comes from. If he's hungry, I'll feed him.

You must not have heard in Canada. We dont have "hungry" children in America anymore...that word is not acceptable by the Bush administration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...111501621.html

But more than 10% of American families are experiencing "very low food security." Not to assist in feeding those children at least one healthy meal a day is socially irresponsible.

[UKking]

Originally Posted by MSD

Illegal immigrants pay billions of dollars in taxes per year because so many obtain fake social security numbers to be able to work. They don't file tax returns for obvious reasons, so they don't get any of it back.

Assuming this is correct, then there should be no problem with feeding the children of illegal immigrants.

[Martian]

Originally Posted by aberkok

Yeah... I don't give a crap about where a kid comes from. If he's hungry, I'll feed him.

I fed aberkok once, and he's short enough to be mistaken for a child.

Seriously, who says no to something like this? I don't care who the kid's parents are. Insane sociopath-terrorist-incestual-hippies? Whatever, fuck it. Hungry kids should be fed. All kids should be educated. And all kids should receive health care. Investing in the next generation is how we improve our society as a whole.

Going off on ratbastid's tangent a bit, I would suggest that crying and chest-thumping over illegal immigrants isn't terribly productive. A more profitable line of inquiry would be why they chose to immigrate illegally, rather than going through proper channels. Is your immigration program needlessly complex or exclusive? Are economic or social factors in their homeland such doing it properly is excessively difficult or impossible? And what can you as a nation do to help alleviate this?

That's my two cents, anyway.

[mixedmedia]

Why should we feed the children of illegal immigrants?

Because they are hungry.

[Baraka_Guru]

If anything, government-paid meals for hungry children will be, in part, deterrents to crime.

[mixedmedia]

I can't even begin conceive of why a person should have to convince anyone that feeding hungry children is a benefit to society. We're talking about feeding kids who might not eat that day otherwise. What the fuck is wrong with people??!!

I need to leave this thread because it will only get me into trouble.

[Tully Mars]

Originally Posted by UKking

Assuming this is correct, then there should be no problem with feeding the children of illegal immigrants.

It's true. They also pay into the Social Security program as well as Medicare and Medicaid through the false SS numbers they use. But they are usually unable to obtain the benefits of these programs due to ID issues.

People complain about the drain on the system they create but they also pump billions into the system as well.

As to the OP...

I find it hard to believe anyone would take the anti feed the hungery child position.

[Miss Mango]

I dont understand how many children who are in the US illegally get into our schools anyway. Im not talking about the children who are born here and are citizens but their parents are illegal immigrants, I mean the children who are ALSO here illegally. Dont you need a birth certificate to get into school? Are they forging birth certificates?

[BlueEyes]

I'm studying to teach, and last semester the elementary school that I observed/taught in had 75% of its students on the free and reduced lunch program. While there were many different races in the school, the majority of the students were white. On top of the lunch program every Friday the school gave out backbacks donated to them, that were filled with snacks for the weekend. The backpacks went to the kids on the lunch program, and it was so sad to see all of those backback lined up and down the hallway.

No matter what the race of these children, they are not at fault, if anything they are victims. A lot of their parents give them very little attention, and spend more money on booze and cigarettes than they do on their children.

Feed the kids, legal or not. My hope is that if we feed them, they will be able to concentrate better in school, become better people, and contribute positively to our country, instead of becoming yet another family on welfare.

[snowy]

Originally Posted by Miss Mango

I dont understand how many children who are in the US illegally get into our schools anyway. Im not talking about the children who are born here and are citizens but their parents are illegal immigrants, I mean the children who are ALSO here illegally. Dont you need a birth certificate to get into school? Are they forging birth certificates?

ALL children are required to attend school. Compulsory education laws make no differentiation between citizens and non-citizens. There are no ID requirements to get a child into school--just immunization records, typically.

A portion of the compulsory education law in my state reads such:

the district school board shall admit free of charge to the schools of the district all persons between the ages of 5 and 19 who reside within the school district.

Haven't you ever heard of not visiting the sins of the father upon the children? Don't we want children to be educated, and to have better than what their parents had, regardless of where their parents came from? In the United States, we love to talk the talk about the myth of someone pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps.

Guess what?

You can't pull yourself up by your own bootstraps if you aren't wearing boots.

[Grasshopper Green]

Originally Posted by Miss Mango

I dont understand how many children who are in the US illegally get into our schools anyway. Im not talking about the children who are born here and are citizens but their parents are illegal immigrants, I mean the children who are ALSO here illegally. Dont you need a birth certificate to get into school? Are they forging birth certificates?

I was going to stay out of this thread...

My dad used to teach at an elementary school in which the student body was almost exclusively comprised of immigrant children. Some were legal, some were refugees from places like Darfur and the Balkans, and some were illegal.

All the kids at his school needed was proof of immunization, which you can get at a local clinic. It is illegal for him to ask the kids if their parents are legal or not. The majority of the kids in his school got free lunch, and for many kids, it was their only meal of the day unless they also got free breakfast.

If the school didn't feed those kids, they didn't eat. A hungry kid is a disruptive, hell raising kid. A hungry kid has no control whether his parent makes enough money to adequately care for him. A hungry kid has little chance of learning if the growl in his tummy is louder than his teacher's voice. Why would anyone want to deny that hungry kid a meal?

[Merlocke]

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.