On the off chance you're interested in school lunches I highly recommend watching videos of Japanese school lunches on YouTube. There's a bunch out there now and if you were raised in the American system it will probably blow your mind. The idea that lunches can be freshly made, on site, out of healthy ingredients and children are active participants in serving and cleaning up is just crazy. When I encountered it for the first time I felt like a big part of my childhood had been sold to the lowest bidder.
South Korea started dabbling in free school lunches around 2001 - when a few schools started it. It gained momentum, and then it became a huge debate in 2011, when Seoul's mayor somehow decided he hated free lunches so much that he arranged a referendum, and said he would quit if people didn't agree with him on the matter. He did quit.<p>Fast forward to 2025, and now free school lunches are nearly ubiquitous. Once people experience it, few want to go back. Because it's a much more efficient and hassle-free system.<p>Yes, of course the money is coming from tax: in other words, if you're a middle-class parent, nothing changed. You're still paying for your kids' lunch one way or the other. But you don't have to pay for a gratuitous system of bureaucracy that keeps track of which kids' parents are making how much money, and whether each kid is "eligible" to eat lunch today, so your money is actually being used more efficiently with less overhead.
Many people, especially in our subculture, tend to feel like if they can't solve an entire problem forever, if they can't Change The World, what they're doing is futile and pointless<p>But most people can't change the world. Most individuals <i>shouldn't</i> have the power to change the world. What we <i>can</i> do is be a force for good in the lives that are proximal to us. If we can make a few people's lives better, we should rest easy knowing that we've done our part.<p>If we can do more than that, then great. But never let the overwhelming hugeness of the entire world cripple your ability to make your little dent. Most people only get the chance to make a little dent - if that - and there's nothing wrong with that.
I feel like this has already been discussed before one million times more than the simplicity of the issue should require.<p>Any income etc based coupon system is inefficient and automatically excludes a big portion of children that such measures are supposed to be for, eg because a lot of them come from families that are too dysfunctional to apply for those, ignorant of them due to language and other barriers, or because of (perceived or not) social stigma. And while adults are considered responsible for their own lives, it is a total moral bankruptcy for a society to have their children starve for their parents dysfunction. At the same time, providing free lunch to children at school solves/eases <i>a lot</i> of social, health and other issues all at once, for a cost that is basically peanuts compared to how impactful it can be.
New York State just passed universal free lunch and breakfast for public school students. Of all the things that we spend our tax dollars on, this feels like a no brainer. Making sure children are fed should be at the top of the list.
I’m thankful I live in a state that uses my tax money to make all school breakfast and lunches free. I wonder what percentage of state taxes is actually required to pay for all school breakfast and lunches? Making sure kids aren’t inhibited from learning because of empty stomachs seems like a no brainer.
Is the overhead in deciding who gets free lunch and who doesn't and then managing the debt really saving more money than just giving all public school kids free lunches with no strings attached?
I love living in Minnesota.<p>Walz passed the Free Meals for School Kids Program[^1] at my elementary school, no less! about two years ago.<p>I’m happy that other states are finally realizing, <i>gee, this is such a straightforward issue we could actually solve.</i><p>[^1] <a href="https://education.mn.gov/MDE/dse/FNS/SNP/free/" rel="nofollow">https://education.mn.gov/MDE/dse/FNS/SNP/free/</a>
As someone from Europe, I had heard before about bankrupting ambulance rides, slavery in prisons, and food deserts. I did not expect to add “lunch money humiliation ritual” to that list. I’ll think of this next time I complain about my 50% income tax.
DISD ( Dallas Independent School District ) has had free lunch for as long as i can remember. Free breakfast too. On school holidays you can still goto school and get a meal. I want to say they do this on weekends too. Granted, MREs from an Army surplus store are better than school lunch but it is free. I don't think my kids have ever eaten a school lunch.<p>During COVID my wife and I got a EBT (food stamps) card in the mail from the school district with like $2,000 on it for food. It was basically the dollars spent on school lunch for the time the kids were not in school.
As an Australian, I find it crazy that getting food from a cafeteria at school is the norm in the US.<p>In Australia you bring food from home 90% of the time. On special occasions or every now and then you order lunch from the canteen.<p>It seems almost against American individualism to have a communal meal where everyone is served up the same food and sit indoors in a dining hall. Maybe it is just strange to me but I can't be the only person to think this.
Surely it can't be that expensive to just provide every child living in our country that so desires/needs it three decent meals a day, regardless of their situation? That one has always confused me, if our country is actually prosperous and powerful, that something as simple as that seems like a given that would be embarrassing not to provide.
> “That’s stupid,” she said with 7-year-old clarity. “Why don’t they just let them eat?”<p>We’ll spend the rest of that child’s life convincing them that the answer to that is complicated.
It's astonishing this is a thing. I'm thankful to live in Massachusetts where all kids can get lunch for free with no questions asked. Where I live, kids can get breakfast too, however I've heard that isn't universal in the state.<p>The article points out another issue that is so widespread. Often times, being right above or below a cut off line can make a huge difference and it's kids just above the cut off line here that are suffering. I have a brother with disabilities and there are "lines" drawn all the time with funding that are either all or nothing. If you cross a line, you lose funding. It encourages them to work less, save less money, and be more reliant on state funding. Why haven't we figured out gradients yet? For example, above this line you get 90% of costs covered. Above this line 80%. Above this line 70%. etc... etc... etc...
As someone who experienced this first hand growing up. I consider how someone feels about free school lunch, a basic test of their humanity.<p>If you think kids should go hungry or be embarrassed at school because of their parents finances… we can’t be friends, nor acquaintances. IMHO, you are subhuman at that point and not worth my time.<p>My dad believed that because he paid taxes he shouldn’t have to pay the school to feed me. I begged, borrowed, and stole spare change to pay. He’d chip in once in a while, but once you are so far in debt they won’t feed you anymore (at least they didn’t at the time). I remember going to the lost and found every day to check the pockets of the clothes in there. I learned how to pick the locks on the gym lockers and would steal money from other kids pockets. I sometimes left school so I could go steal lunch from a grocery store near by. I got caught once, but after the lady knew what was up, she conveniently was always looking away from me during mid day of I came in. From the bottom of my heart I hope she receives every possible blessing in this life.<p>No child should have to do that. Ever! Happy to pay taxes to and live in a state that has solved this problem!
> It’s larger in that the entire structure of how we feed children at school is a tangle of federal programs, income thresholds, paperwork requirements, and local policies<p>If DOGE was anything other than an attempt to entrench executive control and execute performative cruelty, this is the stuff it would be tackling.<p>There are so many arbitrary conflicting policies that each only make things slightly less inefficient to the point where it doesn’t make sense to spend the energy fixing them, but put together they really add up to tangible and significant experiences in people’s lives.<p>An “all of the above” concentrated effort that looks at everything together, and then makes a list of suggestions to consolidate and harmonize policies that Congress can then pick through for the ones they agree upon on both sides of the aisle and pass quickly and unanimously would make a massive difference.<p>Sure, it may take a year instead of a few months to achieve this, but the changes would be beneficial, non destructive, and lasting, none of which can be said of even a generous perspective of what was actually done.
My poor country (Moldova) just implemented free lunches for kids in primary and middle schools.<p>What is the reason US doesn’t have this already at federal level?
My mother suffered severe post-partum depression when I was 7 so I got my 5 year old brother and I off to school most mornings in the 60's. Thankfully I grew up in California so we were never food shamed unlike some states that still think lunch debt is a moral failure.
It’s definitely an experience to see the food you got thrown away and be given an apple and some bread instead.<p>Many kids would opt to bring in a pack of ramen, crush it up, add the seasoning and eat it dry instead. Many (myself included) just wouldn’t eat to avoid the humiliation.<p>But, hey, at least we had that most expensive high school football stadium in the world for a time!
For anyone from places in the US or abroad who can't understand why a society would subject children to this sort of situation, here are some of the attitudes that give rise to it:<p>"I shouldn't have to pay to feed other people's kids"<p>"If you don't shame the kids, the parents will never take responsibility for them"<p>"A lot of those [poor] kids are overweight anyways"<p>I've heard all of these said in some form.
Something that cannot be ignored, but seems quite glossed over in this thread of 400 comments: elementary and middle school are typically the best and most important day-care service for working parents. Especially anyone who is blue-collar and does not choose their schedule, any single parent who cannot be home at all during the day, double-income parents who are likewise absent.<p>It is one thing for comparatively comfortable white-collar homemaker moms to lovingly pack a little lunch for all their kids the night before. It's another thing entirely for them to send their kids packing and rely on the school itself to provide that nutrition.<p>And personally I see this as a bit of a dilemma. Because parenting and homemaking skills are often honed by the practice of preparing lunches and providing for the children. If you, as a parent, are not accustomed to doing this, you're going to bond less with those children, you're going to rely on state assistance more, and your children are going to bond less with you, resulting in a more distant relationship than one forged through the common experience of acquiring, preparing, and consuming food.<p>So free school lunch assistance is, in some ways, mandatory for a culture of working parents, and certainly if we're going to keep children out of the industrialized workforce, we need to keep them in school and well-fed. But at some point, children become quite dependent on the state and they are going to look to the state to provide other needs, as well, if the parents are not stepping up to that. So will children grow into full-fledged contributors who pull their own weight, or will they simply exist to expand the welfare state?
I read a recent comment that changed my mind about school lunches (free for all, not just those that need it).<p>Essentially, if you're legally required to be somewhere, meals should be provided.
This article doesn't seem to really explain how this whole debt thing works. What I'm guessing happens is some kids go to the cafeteria and get food, and then their parents are supposed to pay the bill later, and they can't afford it so they don't (and maybe their parents told them they can't afford and they're supposed to bring a lunch to school but they didn't listen, or their parents didn't tell them). So then the lunchlady has to act like a debt collector and go take their food away and replace it with something cheaper (not sure why they just don't decline them the hot lunch food in the first place).<p>Does this sound right?
I would expand on this - there are a surprising number of times where a relatively small amount of money would make a large difference to one or multiple people.<p>Most people I know who have ended up in debt for example didn't not have the money to pay the debt entirely, they were just short for one month by a small amount. It's not long till it spirals completely out of control with interest, repayment penalties, etc, and that interest keeps adding up.<p>A family member that is the sole income earner for a household had their car break down. They had no additional income to fix it, no additional income to get another car and failing to get to work would spiral out their financial situation. That day I gave them an old car and told them to keep it. They used it for a month, eventually got the other car fixed and sold the car I gave to them.
“ families who qualify but don’t complete the paperwork for various reasons, ranging from language barriers to pride to bureaucratic overwhelm.”<p>Fear of legal action against them.<p>Giving all kids a hot meal is a no brainer eat win for society. We gave it to them, then took it back.
This doesn't really exist in the UK, I think. Most people get free school meals if they're on state benefits (as I did when I was younger). **<p>However - what a great thing to do to just ring up a school and pay off their debt, and then start a charity to do that and advocate for policy change.<p>I think people don't realise how much impact they can have when they just take action. You don't have to be anyone special.<p>//edit//** Or rather, lunch debt does not exist. Free lunch shaming definitely does. A colleague that had free school meals told me that at her school, people with free school meals had to get their meals last.
Childhood nutrition and Lead exposure are the two highest impact issues that can be easily solved to improve life-time outcomes, and yet we don't fix it.<p>It is mind boggling that we leave kids starving in america, and we are going to pay for it for decades.
I'm confused about the mechanics of the process here. Could someone explain how paying off the lunch debt translates to hot meals? I'm confused because the fact that a continuous debt -- however the amount -- means your expenses exceed your revenue. So even if you pay it off... doesn't that mean when doors open tomorrow, there'll be new debt, and thus the problem will still recur? Or is the idea that the debt was decreasing?<p>Edit: Fixed some misunderstanding in my comment.
>> But what if the truth is that we need all of these approaches simultaneously? What if paying off a specific child’s lunch debt today doesn’t preclude advocating for a complete structural overhaul tomorrow? What if the emotional resonance of specific, concrete actions is precisely what builds the coalition necessary for systemic change?<p>That might happen, but I hate to say that another possibility is people come to <i>expect</i> that someone will just pay the debt. Where unpaid bills may look like some kind of problem, a lack of unpaid bills looks like things are fine and no change is needed. Short term solutions are best implemented along with long term ones. But to the authors point, you gotta start somewhere or <i>nothing</i> will happen.
I might be misunderstanding the problem but in Australia the parents send the kids to school with packed lunches proportional to the household income… fancy lunches for rich kids, and rice or bread for poor kids.
I love stories like this one. It reminds me of my college years when I partook in a non-profit that was started by my aunt / uncle where we fed the homeless. I learned then that anyone can just step in and do something right in society, you don't have to waste hours, days, months, and years waiting for daddy government to do it.
I've had this slowly creeping realization that everything in this world is just some persons choice.<p>Seems like an obvious and banal statement. But this is a perfect example.<p>We all think that there is some specialization you need, some certificate, there's something special about the people who do x thing, you need some committee or approval. But no, you just need start doing something. And if you stick to it people will probably join you sooner or later.
What I don't get about lunch in school is where this assumption comes from that it has to be a warm and complete meal, ideally with starter and dessert.<p>I am really wondering about that. School is more like an office job than a construction site or other heavy work and thus would not a sandwich and a salad be more appropriate? It would be much easier to offer good quality this way, especially when it comes to fruits and vegetables. The stuff you get when cooking with a limited budget for hundreds of people is seldom good or healthy.
A political party in New Zealand just considered rolling back school lunches to only those in need, rather than every kid at a lower decile school. This article is a great response to why that is a bad idea.
When I first started high school, my parents worked a lot, so they left me to fend for myself and I was terrible about packing lunches, so lunchtime was always stressful. I ended up getting a job washing dishes in the school kitchen, which got me a ticket for a free lunch. We weren't rich, but we were definitely comfortably middle class. I'm sure there were a lot of kids like me. It would have been a lot better if the food was free.<p>Edit: grammar
Its amazing that US still doesn't have free school lunches. India started free school lunches in early 60s from southern state of Tamil Nadu and now default across the country. It was one of the main factors that reduced malnutrition in children and improved school attendance. People just sent kids to schools, so they can have a decent meal.
His daughter's question nails it: "Why don't they just let them eat?" The fact that we don't have a clear, defensible answer to that tells you everything
> and eliminated lunch debt at 12 schools. That’s 12 schools where kids don’t get their trays taken away<p>For a few weeks. Then presumably there will be debt again.<p>If you get a major wound then applying a tourniquet can be a great move to stabilise the patient until the problem can be fixed. If you have a memory leak, killing the process and restarting it is a great move to get the system working again, but you need to tackle the root cause.<p>The only solution I can see would be for the state to pay for everyone's meals
It does seem odd to decide to spend $$$$ of public money educating a child, but to refuse to spend $ feeding that same child, but still spending $ building a billing and accounting system to figure out whose parents haven't paid.
It's a no brainer. Kids perform better at school if they're fed lunch. If it improves test scores those lunches pay for themselves in basic externalities when the kid grows up with better chances in life. I don't recall the numbers but the return on investment is worth it<p>It's always more expensive in the long run to allow kids to go hungry
Bravo to this guy. I’m donating. I hope he continues to help kids but then helps get the legislation changed such that school lunches are free. It’s an investment in the kids. With food in their bellies they can better focus on learning.<p>Why the f should a child have to pay for their food at school the purpose is to learn not be faced with the realization their families are poor every single day.
Am I missing something? My kids have to bring their own lunch to school. The school is for education and the parents' job is to feed them. And it gets even better: after 12/13 yo they grow self supporting capabilities, so as parent you only need to replenish the fridge.
Did not realize it happened just so recently in California:<p>> In the 2022-23 school year, California became the first state to provide free school meals to any child regardless of whether they were eligible for the free or reduced-price meals as defined by the federal government.
So this debt would normally be paid by the parents of each child?<p>Do they pay like a couple of bucks per meal and if they forget to pay then a debt accrues?
Do different kids get different meals in US schools? I mean for non-medical or dietary purposes? The article doesn't seem to be very clear on that... Is it that when the school's debt gets to a certain point, all kids' meals are replaced by "alternative meals"? Or do some kids' meals only get switched? If so what is the deciding criterion?
In The Peoples Republic of Scotland, all primary kids get free lunches now, I think (Primary is aged 4/5 to 11/12).<p>When it was introduced, my son was in P1 or 2. We spoke to the head and asked if we could pay for our son's lunch as we didn't need the freebie. She said there was no way to pay for it: it was free whether you wanted it or not.<p>Crazy.<p>I'm a rampant capitalist, every man for himself and all that but there is something about denying kids the fundamentals, like shelter, food etc. that rubs me up the wrong way. There should never be a situation where they are denied proper lunches. Never.<p>School lunch debt is an adult-designed problem that we shouldn't be passing onto kids.
One thing I don’t like about the free lunch but never mentioned is that it is by necessity very cheap food, and that means carbage.<p>Try getting a kid to eat vegetables when processed bread products are being handed out at school. Healthy eating pretty much stopped that year. Which is a shame because it’s not expensive.
It always felt strange to me that although the US is clearly a guilt-driven culture, it has shame-based mechanics of control when it comes to finances. May it be due to protestant christianity losing its former position of influence? So that more archaic forms of human behavior control take precedence?
Nit: could not stand the writing style. It took 3-4x more words than it should have.<p>On the topic I agree and believe strongly that all kids should receive free food at school. It amazes me people will fight to prevent when to me the costs are small but the benefit can be huge for the next generation.
When I read the first paragraph, my immediate question is, is the PB&J alternative meal actually healthier and more reflective of the nutritional needs (and desires ) of a student than the more expensive normal meals (my thoughts turn to chicken tenders, pizza, corn dogs)<p>I personally reflect back to realize that I started requesting parents / personally making sandwiches ~3rd grade because I was tired of flavorless and relatively unhealthy and repeated cafeteria style food at high price. (and also coming to a similar conclusion regarding the Cafeteria when at University).
There are two sides to the "school lunch debt" problem. Underprivileged kids on one side and everyone else on the other.<p>I fully support paying off/forgiving lunch accounts of underprivileged kids.<p>But.<p>I live in an affluent area. You have kids running up hundreds of dollars a semester because they just don't care. Oh my parents made me lunch? I'll throw it out and get school lunch. Oh my friends want ice cream so I'm buying everyone ice cream.<p>Then the end of the school year comes and it's time to square up those accounts. Guess what? "I didn't tell my kid they can do that. I'm not paying". Then the school district bends to the will of the parents and eat the cost.<p>Fuck those people.
In case you aren’t allow to read the article b/c of your adblocker: <a href="https://archive.ph/LZiES" rel="nofollow">https://archive.ph/LZiES</a>
> The thing about witnessing a 7-year-old having their hot lunch tray yanked away and replaced with a cold sandwich<p>It's bizarre that this happens in America.
If I knew there was a debt like this for less than $1000 at a school nearby I’d probably pay it off. But the information just doesn’t seem to be out there.
Meanwhile, the proposed U.S. defence budget is ~ $1 trillion and the Department of Education is slated to not exist. This tells you much of what one needs to know about that country, and why having hungry children is perfectly ok.<p>There should be a dialectic around individualism and communitarianism but with some number of citizens endorsing a polar position, including the solipsist-in-chief, it’s hard to see a way forward on social issues that require thinking on a moral, noneconomic plane.
Where I went to grade school, I don't recall a peanut butter sandwich option. If you didn't bring a bagged lunch, and you wanted to eat lunch, you had to spend your recess time washing trays. Which I did sometimes.<p>Sometimes, adults want children to go through the same "character building" rituals that they did. For example, working some kind of job, to supposedly teach values about hard work and responsibility.<p>Other times, adults don't want to subject kids to "character building" that they went through. For example, enduring bullying. Or working a crappy job, while their schoolmates played sports, socialized, did extracurriculars, or got a decent night's sleep.<p>On this one, my opinion is: Just feed the children already. Stop stomping them harder with class inequality, and conditioning them to accept that as normal, from a young age. I'd rather have children be raised to reject class inequality -- as unfair, greedy, cruel, and dumb. And more immediately, I want children to be fed, and to get other basic care.
> $835.<p>> ...<p>> It was less than some monthly car payments.<p>I'm not sure what kind of car, but that's way above any car payment I've ever had to pay. ;)
Upon seeing the term "school lunch debt", I was confused. My country has had free school lunches for all students since before I was born. Not a matter of economy or socialism, I thought, for everyone <i>can</i> afford food, but just convenience.<p>"7-year-old clarity" indeed.
Paying off lunch debt as individuals is very double.<p>Of course it feels good cause you are helping people but at the same time you are helping the symptom not the cause.<p>Just to keep paying the debts is like to just keep plugging the dyke while new holes keep opening up. You need a new system. What that means in this case is government intervention!<p>2.8 million is NOTHING to the U.S. government, in 2023 the US defense had 1.9 trillion dollars unaccounted for. TRILLION. [1]<p>Some quick math gives:
2.8 million / 1.9 trillion * 100 = 0,00014736842 %<p>If the government gave a fuck or was forced to give a fuck this lunch debt bullshit would not be a thing.<p>1. <a href="https://coloradonewsline.com/2023/12/06/pentagon-cant-pass-audit/" rel="nofollow">https://coloradonewsline.com/2023/12/06/pentagon-cant-pass-a...</a>
Interesting reading in the linked article beyond the quote.<p>"In the Reagan administration’s attempt to slash $1.5 billion from children’s nutrition funding, school lunch program requirements were worded (whether deliberately or not) so as to conceivably allow for designating ketchup as a vegetable..."<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketchup_as_a_vegetable" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketchup_as_a_vegetable</a>
In Canada we don’t have school lunches and I’ve always found the concept ridiculous. Sending a lunch can be as simple as a sandwich with some fruit and veggies on the side. It’s cheap and takes about 5 minutes to make. Some people are trying to introduce school lunches now even though we already have a child benefit program which gives parents money specifically for this. To me it seems like it’s actually just a way to cover up the fact that millions of parents are child abusers who don’t feed their kids. I just can’t get around the idea that we’re enabling neglect.<p>Very few schools (if any) have a cafeteria that serves food. Everyone brings their lunch and it works well.
I don't know exactly why but I so much appreciated the 'average guy-ness' and humility of the author. Good job, man. I wish there were more good people like you, starting with me...
Pretty depressing.
I'm pretty right wing but kids should always be taken care of.
I'll happily pay more in property tax to cover school lunches and kids medical.
That's very kind. Now if we can start getting some real food into American school instead of SNAP Slop. If France and South Korea can manage it, we can as well.
Paying off the debt doesn’t solve anything. They’ll get to buy one meal, go back into debt because their parent doesn’t top up the account, and get banned again.
This whole fight feels nonsensical. This isn't a money issue, it's just a convenience issue. It was the same way with my parents when I was in school; they made plenty of money, but it was a pain trying to fill a lunch card or give my cash to buy lunches.<p>There are a million programs for kids who are legitimately too poor to pay for lunches, not to mention bringing a lunch which is significantly cheaper and probably better for the kid. This guy just paid for lazy parents