Is not the ongoing school-lunches fiasco an example, of how wrong Socialism is?

[Міша]

You pay taxes, so everybody "gets a shot", so every child gets to eat at school...

Except, once your money are taken from you, you no longer have a choice of what is served:
<<
Not only is the mandated food not popular and often wasted, there also is not enough of it, and students are protesting. Students in one district have released a YouTube video parodying their quest for enough to eat during the day. A Facebook page asks kids to send in pictures of their meager lunches.
>> http://pjmedia.com/blog/wasted-food-hung...in-action/

It is a general problem with government spending in general - every dollar paid by a taxpayer in taxes, robs the taxpayer of choice, giving that choice to the charlie rangels in Congress.

Is this most-recent manifestation a good illustration?
Government spending IS Socialism. The more of it, the more Socialist a regime... Some of it is inevitable (such as spending on military or courts), but most should be cut ASAP.
What "kids starving"? Kids (and adults) overeating is the problem America is facing in the 21st century...
Mix Bee, of course, one is not required to BENEFIT from government-provided programs - it is (usually) legal to bring your own lunch, or even to go to a private school (as Obama's daughters are doing). But whether you benefit from such a program, you always have to PAY for it anyway...

[dr.pepper106]

What the fu@k are you talking about, what socialism in the school lunches, link please.

[Jim]

actually, a VERY good example of the idiocy of socialism is last ights NFL game!..the replacement Refs gave a touchdown on an interception to the WRONG team! (note, I did not watch the game, I don't give 2 shites about football!)

[Jesus Christ]

That has nothing to do with socialism, though.

Government spending actually is not socialism in and of itself. Socialism is a political and economic theory which states that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. A school deciding not to serve lunches or to serve lunches students don't like is not socialism.

"What "kids starving"?" -- the kids in the US and the world over who are starving. What's hard to understand about that?

[chris s]

Annie Hall reference there? The food is terrible and the portions are small!

And there are much, much better ways of dealing with this problem than not providing school lunches. Many schools are moving towards fresher options that are more popular, healthier, and end up being cheaper for the school, too!

So yes, there are problems, but deciding to let kids starve isn't the solution.

Also, not every child qualifies for free lunch.

[BigBill]

No. Forced busing, affirmative action, minority quotas, homosexual marriage, homnosexuals in the military, eminent domain, and an increase in the capital gains tax are all examples of how wrong socialism is.

[★Ŕ♡MΛŔƐ★]

I don't know. Does the fact that we have millions of children starving in this rich country an example of how capitalism fails?

[Mix Bee]

Kids are not required to eat school-provided lunches. If they don't like what is served, they are free to pack their own shitlunch of processed meat on squishy white bread, a bag of greasy chips and a package of Twinkies and they can was it all down with as much soda as they can carry. I'm sure their republican parents would be all for it. After all, wouldn't want the little darlings to be a tad healthy, would they?

[Weise Ente]

Except kids always complain about school lunches.

Hell, the maximum calories allowed in a school lunch is about the same as a McDonald's hamburger with fries.

They get enough food.

["Get a life."]

No,but your awkward question sure does make me worried that taxpayers may have failed to get value in the classrooms of the schools you attended. Children who are hungry will eat regardless of what is served. If they are as picky as you make them out to be,I doubt they are truly hungry.
BTW,American schools are not required to offer lunch programs. It is a decision at the local level,not the federal level.