Civil War Doomsday Clock

[Zlaxer]

Stop arguing with statists - they want what they want, we want what we want. The two sides are fundamentally at odds - its a waste of time to try to compromise or convert each other - we need to accept that it’s time to separate.

[Montegriffo]

Glad to see you are finally recognising the dangers of poor food handling practices.

Schools should ensure that both canteen and packed lunches are safe to eat.

Not really sure why this needs stating and still not seeing evidence that banning certain foods is financially motivated.
In fact, outbreaks of food poisoning just emphasises the need to set up strict guidelines for school meals.

[Montegriffo]

Whether it's off to school or work, millions of Americans carry "bag" lunches. Food brought from home can be kept safe if it is first handled and cooked properly. Then, perishable food must be kept cold while commuting via bus, bicycle, on foot, in a car, or on the subway. After arriving at school or work, perishable food must be kept cold until lunchtime.

Looks like good health advice not financially motivated government overreach to me.

[Speaker to Animals]

Let me frame this in a way that even a child should understand:

What pissed off the commissars in the government schools was that parents were opting out of the state's cafeteria revenue stream. If, like school tuition, parents were forced to pay for school lunches and, if they so chose to feed their children decent food from home, they had to pay for their own food separately even though their kids did not consume the state slop, the commissars would not be upset in the slightest. They still get their money. That's all that matters.

The fact that parents are sending kids to real schools outside the government school district does not bother the state employees at all because the government school prisons still get their sweet tuition dollars whether parents pay for a SECOND TUITION PAYMENT or not. The school lunches were opt-in, and the best way to put quotes around "opt-in" was to ban most forms of home lunches.

Get back to me when you actually grok what the fuck we are talking about. Thanks.

So that you can't bury it. You might as well give up. I will keep reposting it until you honestly address it. I am sick of your shit when you know you lost an argument.

[Speaker to Animals]

Ignoring Monty's ridiculous attempt to avoid admitting the motive of the school was to protect their lunch food revenue stream, I'd like to get a little bit Taleb-esque on folks here to argue that, even when we take the ostensible excuse at face value, the overall risk to children from centralized compulsive lunch services is far greater than the risk of kids bringing their own lunches to school and possibly getting sick.

The risk that any student's mother fails to include two cold packs and the sandwich meat develops enough bacteria to cause infection before the student eats his lunch at 11:30-12:00 represents an individual risk. It gets that student sick, but not every other student in the student body. All the students packing lunch boxes protects the entire student body from risk of food poisoning because each has relatively separate sources of food (with the problems of Big Agra's centralized food distribution being a separate issue we cannot address at the school level). Furthermore, when little Jimmy gets sick because Mom (probably named Deborah, let's be honest) forgot to pack cold packs in his lunch box, his parents are the ones who paid the cost because it was their child who got sick. They have every interest in the future to avoid making that simple mistake.

The random effect of a few kids getting sick from poorly packed lunch boxes serves to create greater resiliency in the health of the entire student body overall, because each incident is most likely to result in parents emending their lunch packing practices and each incident is insulated from affecting the other children.

These nanny statist attempts at eliminating risk through centralized control ALWAYS result in a worse outcome whereby you will see long periods of no incidents followed by a mass event (in this case, the entire student body exposed to food poison instead of just one kid). In this case, it takes only one mistake in the lunch cafeteria to infect the entire student body, whereas one mistake before only got one kid sick. Furthermore, because the government employees themselves face no consequences (no skin in the game), they are much less likely to emend their practices to avoid that happening in the future.

This iatrogenic risk is unavoidable. You actually want the small random effects and their risks because those things make society stronger and more resilient. By eliminating them through centralized control, you just create a more fragile system which, while in the meantime seems much safer, only sets you up for dramatic failures.

There really exists no justification for this shit. The entire government school program is an experiment at every level proving this lesson.

[Montegriffo]

Ignoring Monty's ridiculous attempt to avoid admitting the motive of the school was to protect their lunch food revenue stream

Fifes link said self-funded lunch service. That doesn't imply a profit so not a revenue stream. Especially as the school is now owed $20,000 by parents upset that poorer students get free meals.
Still no evidence of a financial motive for banning certain foods.

Plus you're now arguing that a little food poisoning is good for you.

I disagree.

[Speaker to Animals]

Fuck off. You cut out arguments and then make completely irrelevant snipes at opening lines. You are a dishonest participant here, Monty. You know you are wrong. We all know it. Every last one of us see that you are wrong, so you just resort to this dishonesty.

[Fife]

Ignoring Monty's ridiculous attempt to avoid admitting the motive of the school was to protect their lunch food revenue stream

Fifes link said self-funded lunch service. That doesn't imply a profit so not a revenue stream. Especially as the school is now owed $20,000 by parents upset that poorer students get free meals.
Still no evidence of a financial motive for banning certain foods.

Plus you're now arguing that a little food poisoning is good for you.

I disagree.

*not a revenue stream*

I'm pretty sure that you can read, Montez. I know the rest of us can. So, just to let you know, we know that you're lying through your NHS teeth or tooth.

In the one particular link I posted a quote from, the warden gave two reasons for prohibiting outside food in the prison: (1.) to eliminate competition for the "business" of selling food to the captives, and (2.) to make life easier for the warden and the prison guards.

“The first and most important reason is a noncompetition regulation from the USDA, which protects school cafeterias from the competition of outside establishments. Food services in our school system are completely self-supported through sales within our schools, and allowing outside items serves as direct competition for their business,” Hampton wrote. “The other reason for this expectation involves the difficulty of managing dropped off items. The size of our school makes it very challenging to manage the number of food and beverage deliveries we have had in recent weeks.”

There are, I expect, a substantial number of other examples one could pull up without too much trouble. That research is not necessary to the argument that I made, and that you will not touch with a ten-foot pole, in that the premise it would refer to is trivial--that is: a compulsory school presumably assumes the authority to control the food that is allowed inside the prison walls, whether that authority is legitimate or not.

So far, all you've managed to dribble out is that inmates should be provided safe food. Whether that is to come from the central supply or through mum's carefully inspected brown bag is just so much misdirection. I'm pretty sure that no one is going to take the bait that prisoners should be denied food or served poisonous food. STA is obviously correct that centralized food control by a bunch of government stoolies with no skin in the game is a poor plan. So what?

[TheReal_ND]

Muh food safety

[Montegriffo]

''self-supported'' still doesn't mean revenue generator.

Best practice is still best practice, no matter what other motives you wish to attach to it.