In Britain they are, and the percentage of pupils entitled to them in each school is used to measure how affluent or deprived the school's intake overall is.
In Britain they are, and the percentage of pupils entitled to them in each school is used to measure how affluent or deprived the school's intake overall is.
Yes, in my state close to 80% can get free meals if they want to.
I am not sure, but for instance in collage, you get a card to get discount food, you get solid lunch for a price of chewing gum, and every student has this
In the US yes, where I lived they didn't have to be that poor relatively for a discount or free meals I was eligible myself a few times as a child. I totally support the free meals program, however they really should have had healthier options the quality of food in the school meals was terrible usually, and most of the food was gross and unappetizing sadly I brought a lunch 80% of the time or more.
*Sorry to clarify I'm talking about the US not Canada since that's where I went to school.
Nope, you have to take your own meal.
Not that I'm aware of, I'm sure there are programs in some places though. My school had free breakfast in the form of fruit, cheese, toast, cereal bars, orange juice et cetera
No.
No such thing as a free lunch here.
The first 4 years of school are free meals for all students. Then it depends on the status of the family, it concerns not only monetary income. If family members are, for example, some kind of preferential category. Often, instead of a free lunch, some places offer monetary compensation.
All schools here have free food for everyone except teachers in some cases
Every public school offers state-funded meals for students of any social strata. Being public schools it will be mostly lower and lower-middle class. It started to be omnipresent with Lula but Bolsonaro did not stop.
More important than everything, it's actual food and not a snack. I don't know if they exist in Peru but comparing with Argentina, it's much like a "comedor universitario". It's good to see that at least one of the three daily meals are covered by
the State, especially when we pay the amount of taxes we do around here.
Contrary to what you would expect, school meals are not free in France, eventhough the left tries to make it free and there are all sorts of financial help in some areas.
In people's mind anything becoming free is gonna turn into lower/bad quality. This is one of the country's funny dilemma, as on one hand socialists like to make everything free and this is a segragating element in schools, yet... you don't mess with food in France.
not really free ,more some social assistance for the poor parents, a kind of social care
new yorker school canteen,normally they shouldn't starving to death
https://s.france24.com/media/display...9a2daca54b.jpg
Only families with an annual income equal to or less than ~3000 euros are entitled to free school meals. Keep in mind that such an income is not even poverty, but extreme poverty. The rest have to pay, but the amount is almost symbolic, between 0.70€ and 1.50€ for a full meal.
Yeah, and then the kids have the audacity to complain about the quality of the food.
Here it's families under the state poverty line, which includes most of the rural US. Note that the parents have to turn in their tax returns to first prove their poverty, and many parents don't believe in hand outs. A lot of kids at my school would have qualified if their parents were willing to fill out the form, but they just went hungry.
The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is from the USDA and is based on federal poverty level given household size. This is the same for all states and territories except for Alaska and Hawaii because of higher cost of living. Reduced lunches require up to 185% of poverty level and free lunches up to 130%. I don't think states can change the criteria.
Here is a recent edibility table from the USDA:
https://i.ibb.co/LJmZy0D/fr-020923.jpg
https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/fr-020923
I understand that beggars can't be choosers, but children have no control over whether or not they are born into poverty. In my area, if you're on free lunch, you are given a significantly lower quality of food, including things that have been reheated throughout the entire week to the point of being nearly inedible. It's mortifying being a kid and trying to chew up a rock-hard chicken nugget just because your parents can't or won't take care of you.
Yeah, there's a difference between being picky and disliking the food, versus being given food which is spoiled, stale, reheated daily over the course of a week, or otherwise unsafe-- just because your parents can't or won't pay.
If you're poor enough to get free lunch, you probably don't have the opportunity to eat at home, either.
When i was in school you had to bring your own lunch like a sandwich there wasnt a mensa in the school nor cooking
Food stamps are only helpful for children whose parents are willing and able to apply. Children of ill parents, substance-abusing parents, or parents who "refuse handouts" often do not benefit from food stamps. Lots of families are eligible for assistance and for whatever reason still allow their children to go hungry. There are families that DO get food stamps and still refuse to feed their children. That's why I think schools should provide decent-quality food to all children, regardless of the family's willingness or ability to pay. School lunch is the only food some kids get, and when the school lunch you're allowed to eat consists of an expired milk carton and a slice of cheese on stale bread, you're basically fucked
It can happen in any state. There are plenty of families that are either too negligent to apply for food stamps, or apply for them anyway and still refuse to feed their children. That's why I said that parents who are very sick or on drugs may either not apply, or apply and still neglect to feed their kids.