The weird part for me is that Arby’s would be uniquely and ironically good at feeding kids. Their food is easy, cheap, and packs well (they are sandwiches). As bad as corporate sponsorship of public institutions is they could have likely done more good by directly donating food (they do have the meats after all).
Typical “feel good” story to distract from the fact that there shouldn’t be a lunch debt to begin with, as is expected from a late stage capitalist hellhole.
During the pandemic lunch was free. It’s odd that during that time a lot of these petty issues were all magically solved but then they just came back and now we don’t know how to deal with it somehow. Infuriating
Republicans are losing their minds because this could have gone directly into the pockets of the wealthy instead of passing through the accounts of the poor to be dirtied before going into the pockets of the wealthy.
As not a US resident, I do have to point out that school lunch debt is a thing in Blue states as well. I am not going to say one side is the same as the other but this is the major failing with a two party system, after time it all bleeds together.
Assholes, I don’t have or want kids but would be happy if a portion of my taxes went to feeding children rather than paying some contractor to explode them.
I still am absolutely flabbergasted that these assholes turned down FREE FUCKING MONEY TO FEED HUNGRY CHILDREN!
Republicans are all narcissists. They have zero empathy or compassion unless something happens to someone they know. Strangers are just NPCs to republicans.
I’ve seen a ton of republican voters say they’re against it when ever the subject comes up. The argument being that if they can’t afford kids, they shouldn’t have had kids. And if they can’t afford to feed them, it’s better to have the kids taken away.
And as we all know now: if you can’t afford to have kids AND contraceptives then you can’t afford to have sex… Cause they don’t want you getting abortions either.
Yeah, there’s quite a few contradictions. Like they’re the ones encouraging everyone to start having kids. If people say they can’t afford it, conservatives tell them they will find a way. So if they can’t afford it and do, they’re bad patents. If they can’t afford it and don’t, they’re selfish.
Also we shouldn’t spend other people’s money on these people’s kids for lunches. But we can spend even more of that money putting them on the system? Like it would be cheaper to just give them a breakfast and lunch at school. So even looking at it from a libertarian tax is theft standpoint, it’s still spending money on the kids. But more.
In general, sure. But kids will always have parents working odd shifts. Kids with parents who work in hospitals, for example. Those kids should be provided for with food too.
Even now, many elementary schools offer breakfast to kids who get there early. Although many make them pay for it as well. And no dinner.
Children pay for school lunches, some families can’t afford it and get into debt. It’s part of the orphan crushing machine called laissez-faire capitalism.
Yep. A systemic solution to poverty costs more and thus would probably decrease profits. Allowing poverty to exist is cheaper, plus you can do charitable donations. They won’t fix the root of the issue, but you get some good PR and a tax write-off.
Uplifting would be if a kid learned how to hack so he could hack into the lunch and mainframe and drop the tables so that his friends debts were erased.
Precident? Show me a few cases of someone being fired for this.
I worked “one of those jobs” for over a decade. Never happened.
Funny, I googled “fast food worker saves life” and got all kinds of hits – didn’t find any that said they were fired for it. But sure, happens all the time, right?
So the vast majority of these are for stopping shoplifters – not even remotely the same thing.
1 is about some psycho who used someone to get a kidney – even less related.
The other 2 are about policy violations. What policy did the person in this instance violate?
Its extremely telling how wide a net you had to cast for something that happens “all the time” and will “probably” happen to her.
Meanwhile, again, a simple google search for “fast food employee saves life” gives you more examples, and they are actually relevant to the topic at hand, and surprise surprise, they didn’t get fired.
Such a terminally online take to have to jump in with that toxicity on every little story.
Hopefully the glow of public attention will protect her for a little while at least. Corporate probably doesn’t want her calling back GMA for a follow-up interview.
I'm hoping for the happy-cynical, orphan-crushing-machine ending: someone sets up a GoFundMe and raises a bunch of money to allow the mother of four to raise her children and not be stuck managing a Taco Bell.
Flame wars in the comments section don’t do anything but inspire more cynicism and aggression. Don’t like a story? Then downvote it, and maybe leave a constructive comment. Then move on.
Did someone respond negatively, unconstructively, or aggressively? Let a mod know rather than feeding into it. Our community doesn’t need the comments turning into a cesspool of insults.
goodmorningamerica.com
Oldest