The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act Signed: Excellent Reform (That Some Hate)

Leave a comment


Michelle Obama was right when she denounced this childhood obesity as “national security threat.”  The Center for Disease Control and Prevention recently announced one of every three American children are overweight, one out of four are “obese.”  Those that are obese at age 10 will be suffering from hypertension while being a significant risk of having a stroke, diabetes, and heart attack by age 40.

Her unbreakable resolution, campaigning relentlessly for nutrition, has culminated in her husband, President Obama signing The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, which will designate $4.5 billion dollars to improve the standard of nutrition in schools throughout America.

What is The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act and What Effects Will it Have on My Kids?

In the developed world America has the lowest standard of living; while an American will live roughly till age 75 the average Japanese man will live to 85.  I did a survey and every American I talked to said that they wanted to live a longer life rather than a shorter one.  This act is pursues this simple, ancient wish.

There are a number of specific policies that this legislation will enact:

– Reimburses schools significantly more for each free lunch they give out.  These free lunches are exclusively given to kids below the poverty line and cannot afford to buy lunch.  This will allow lower class students to

– Requires all public schools to have “science-based nutrition standards.”  School lunches will move away from deep-fried carbohydrates  towards nutritious and varied meals

– Communal eligibility for free lunches; if 40% of the student population cannot afford food then all breakfasts and lunches for the entire student population is free.  If 2/5 students cannot afford lunch in nearly all situations the other 3 kids desperately need their lunch money as well.

– Foster Children are Automatically Eligible for free lunches.  Many foster kids fall through the cracks of the public lunch system, starving because of their unstable home life.  This gives them the opportunity to get one or two good meals five days of the week, regardless of how much they are moved around

– Children on Medicare get Free Lunches; if these children are on Medicare they have more important  issues than worrying about their lunch.  Now they no longer have to worry.

– New reforms on educating low-income children about the effects of obesity and how they can stay healthy.  It will educate them specifically about  the advantages, both socially and medically, of sports, why they should eat healthier food over less healthy food.

Some legislators  are praising this bill as an example to follow; others are denouncing this bill as an infringement on American constitutional rights.

Who is Rejecting this Act?

There are two separate camps that are resisting and actively trying to weaken these reforms, despite the bill already being signed by President Obama.

The Democrats who are critical of this act are outraged by the $2.2 billion dollars that are transferred from the federal food stamp program to The Health, Hunger-Free Kids Act.  Kids who have dropped out of school will have a significantly harder time getting food stamps to get meals.  Many dropouts have unstable home life and by cutting off these food source will drive some to crime, to support themselves, and the shelters, putting an even heavy burden on the overworked shelter system in America.

The Obama Administration justifies this transfer of capital to help counter the dropout problem.  They reason that if these wayward youth do not have a stable meal plan outside of school it will give them another reason to come in and get lunch.  In this manner they have a much better chance of rejoining the education process.

Republcians critical of this act, notably Sarah Palin, claim it is an infringement on these children’s constitutional rights.  These conservatives claim that if these kids want to eat unhealthy food it is their god given right.

I disagree; I do not support any form killing my fellow citizens, even if is tasty.  Is there anyone who would say differently?

(Full Text of  The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act)

Advertisements

Survival of the Fittest = Incorrect

Leave a comment


“Survival of the fittest,” is one of the strangest terms a person will regularly come across.  It occurs so often because people believe it applies to virtually aspect of life; war, politics, economic forces, video game competitions, and the closing of one ice cream store while another expands.  People look everywhere and they see only the smart and the brilliant beating the test of time.  They believe it is only logical that these victors survive, since they maintained the initiative and pressed onwards to victory while others are turned back by staggering defeats.

Well, that is terribly incorrect.

I will not devalue the people in this world who actually deserve to be where they are.  It takes brilliant pioneers, whether they are devolving a new market or leading audacious expeditions, to lead the economy and the world.  These people are heroes, an example for the rest of humanity to follow.  Behind them are others who bear their standard, people who explore and capitalize on overlooked opportunities.  These two groups of people cover less than 0.5% of the population, one in two hundred.

What about the other hundred ninety-nine?  They latch on those who are triumphant and sponge off some of their success.  Some are relatively motivated, some or miserable excuses for human beings.  These are the office workers, the accountants, the waiters; the grunts.  Their lives are not labeled “SUCCESFUL” instead they are named “STATUS QUO.”  They are perfectly capable of following orders, but lack the imagination to forge their own path.

So there are two groups of people in this world; those who are successful and the parasites who leech that success.  The pull of the weak on the Atlas strength of the strong often brings both of their worlds crashing down.  Companies go out of business for the sole reason that they fail to fix expensive problems that drive them into bankruptcy.  Those that are successful often try to fight these failings, but without the support of their underlings their chances of success are slim.  It takes more than one brilliant mind to solve problems; Albert Einstein didn’t build the atomic bombs by himself.

That brings us full circle.  The vast, vast majority of people succeed for the principle and primary reason that someone else is allowing them to succeed.  At the drop of the hat those in power could cut off those below them, without explanation or reason.  Those below have no way to rehabilitate or retrain, not that they probably had that opportunity in the first place.  This is a corrupt system, one that must be reconstructed and reformed.

How to reform it?  Simple, look to the past.  Past Rome, past Greece, past the dawn of civilization, to the times where men lived in caves and fought saber tooth tigers for food.  Those that were strong hunted and fought.  Those that were dexterous gathered plants and completed chores.  And those that were smart, the predecessor to our current “successful” people, taught.  The passed on their knowledge directly to the next generation to give them the greatest chance of success.

I propose we bring this back.  Not forcefully though, that would end horribly and traumatically.  Instead with some positive incentive, money.  Teachers today work twice as hard as a waiter and make roughly the same, however their jobs are much, much more important.  They educate the future generations to succeed and prosper, or at least that is the theory.  Most of teachers I’ve seen are bovine cows who are counting days till their pension comes in while they collect hundreds of sick and vacation days.  They are not the best to teach.

By upping the salary for teachers it would create more incentive for better qualified applicants to become teachers.  Better teachers means better teaching, which leads to more learning, which translates to better students.  People question where the money would come from to pay these new teachers; loans, but ones that actually would be paid off.  Should a country as a whole population become smarter, because of their improved education, the economy of that country will become better.  The teachers will pay for themselves and keep on paying.

All I ask for is that everyone has the equal opportunity to succeed; both those who are naturally blessed and those who are not.

%d bloggers like this: