More O' That "conservative-compassion"....

.....more-commonly-referred-to as Allowing The Marketplace To Regulate It$elf.

 

I'm having trouble with the link, but I've seen the video associated with this. The scenes, on it, are just one reason why I don't eat meat.

 

I agree. The solution is, end government funding school lunch. Anytime you give government the chance to choose your meal, you end up with this.

Of course I'm amused, Conservatism is against government hand outs, so don't blame this crap on Conservatives.

 

You're assuming this thread is about government hand-outs....which would be a typical "conservative"-response.

 

Now wait a minute, can we agree that there are some folks who might have trouble providing lunch for thier students?

Can we agree that a student who has eaten lunch and is not hungry learns more?

Also, lets just point out, that $146m is a drop in the bucket considering the overall scheme. I am one who says that $1.46 a pound for beef isnt a bad deal considering the larger economic factors.

 

I'm thinkin' most Americans wouldn't mind paying $1.60.....if that guaranteed legitimate-inspections of our food-supply.

 

Shaman,
As you may have noticed, due to my internet connection, video isnt something I can really view without severe time restraints and or crashing my computer.

As for inspecting food, absolutely, but how does one really go about it, we obviously need more enforcement officers which means a larger Federal government.

I was actually a part of a group who managed to get Alaska pink salmon shipped as humanitarian aide to Africa, and am working on getting more salmon for American school lunches.

 

.....i.e. boosting the number of food-inspectors; already the FDA's responsibility.

 

I am aware of the FDA's purpose and function. One has to pay the salaries of those additional inspectors. I would be willing to pay $1.60 as some earlier suggested to pay for the additional safeguards that need to be put in place.

Now that takes an act of Congress and consent from the President. Considering the climate in DC right now, I doubt you will see meaningful action in regards to that.

 

The problem is....too-many people don't want to pay for those safeguards (typically, because they're politician-of-preference has convinced them it's a waste-of-cash). Too-many people expect to live for free, in this country. Our infrastructure is a good example of that, as well.

Then, it's Our obligation to make Life as difficult-as-possible (for those Congressmen/women & President), until they do take action!! We can't expect any action, outta D.C., until we can convince them not doing-so will (only) make their lives more-difficult; The Squeaky-Wheel Option.

*

Allowing The Marketplace To Regulate Itself


​

 

So just how is a government program that hires a private corporation to provide lunch for a government program without proper government inspections an example of a failure in the marketplace?

 

Failure?? Hell.....this scenerio is a windfall-situation for The Marketplace!!!

Who do you think drives the whole Keep-Big-Government-Outta-Our-Lives-agenda.....besides the people who're profitting-most outta the situation?

 

I don't get what you are trying to say.

 

.

What this is about broadly, is the US got in the business of subsidizing agriculture back when it was mostly family farms. Now, agriculture is gigantic agribusiness operations which have as much to do with family operations as general motors. The result has been big surpluses, which in turn were the motivation for the school lunch program. If not for this decades long boondoggle, the government could help poor children by giving them a credit card good to buy lunch somewhere.