Originally Posted by ILG (Post 1218495)

Huh?

Kids are going to get less food if they don't get good grades?

Originally Posted by odooley6985 (Post 1218511)

Meanwhile banks that we bailed out get to pay their CEO's huge bonuses while laying people off. Makes sense.

Originally Posted by Timmy (Post 1218524)

Oooh, another "pile on Jermyn" thread! :lol

(Sorry, JD, couldn't resist. :heeheehee)

Originally Posted by not4saken (Post 1218526)

Stupidest I have ever heard!!!! SERIOUSLY???

Originally Posted by Cindy (Post 1218536)

:naughty No substituting for/or slang words are allowed. Will edit for you.

Originally Posted by Timmy (Post 1218541)

Cut her some slack. She's menopausal. :lol

Originally Posted by scotty (Post 1218549)

:bolt





Oh.. wait...I didn't say that





:popcorn2

Originally Posted by Hoovie (Post 1218555)

Connecting food to grades sounds like a bad idea... but then, I am not an advocate for public education nor public welfare.

Originally Posted by MissBrattified (Post 1218560)

I absolutely do NOT support this idea. If people NEED food and/or shelter, that benefit shouldn't be based on ANYTHING except their need for it. Ridiculous. :foottap

I'm aghast at the idea--and I can't believe you (JD) would even consider it. Did you have your Wheaties this morning??????

Originally Posted by scotty (Post 1218576)

Im betting JD's approval was :stirpot

Originally Posted by MissBrattified (Post 1218606)

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2125011509001/

It looks like someone thinks its a good idea. :blink

Originally Posted by RandyWayne (Post 1218627)

Well, I personally think elements of it are a good idea. If we leave grades out how about using general attendance? I have no problems with tying a parents welfare to actually making sure their kids attend school.

Originally Posted by Cindy (Post 1218629)

I know that some children that have benefits that are not used by their parent(s) correctly. Some trade them for drugs, or other habits. Or waste them on junk food. Maybe the parents need to get good grades, instead of the children.

Originally Posted by MissBrattified (Post 1218637)

:) I'm fine with this. Require parents to attend classes and pass them. :thumbsup

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1218493)

Excellent idea!
But I am short on the details about this.
Does anyone know if this is actually the law somewhere?
if so, where and how is it working for them?

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1218638)

This is an EXCELLENT idea and tie in a 1.0 GPA requirement.

The children of welfare recipients are still the responsibility of the welfare recipients. This is an excellent incentive for parents to practice the minimal parenting skills.

Further, once children get the idea that their family may get money NOW if they perform in school, maybe it will discourage them from skipping school to go into the workforce to "provide for their families."

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1218638)

This is an EXCELLENT idea and tie in a 1.0 GPA requirement.

The children of welfare recipients are still the responsibility of the welfare recipients. This is an excellent incentive for parents to practice the minimal parenting skills.

Further, once children get the idea that their family may get money NOW if they perform in school, maybe it will discourage them from skipping school to go into the workforce to "provide for their families."

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1218638)

This is an EXCELLENT idea and tie in a 1.0 GPA requirement.

The children of welfare recipients are still the responsibility of the welfare recipients. This is an excellent incentive for parents to practice the minimal parenting skills.

Further, once children get the idea that their family may get money NOW if they perform in school, maybe it will discourage them from skipping school to go into the workforce to "provide for their families."

Originally Posted by Wonder (Post 1218542)

Definitely do not agree with this. This would not benefit the kids, it isn't the kids fault that they are depending on help. Some people really do need this help ! Of course there are those adults that abuse this help and it is those kids that would probably be abused by parents if they were the cause of the decline in help.

Originally Posted by Hoovie (Post 1218555)

Connecting food to grades sounds like a bad idea... but then, I am not an advocate for public education nor public welfare.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1218638)

This is an EXCELLENT idea and tie in a 1.0 GPA requirement.

The children of welfare recipients are still the responsibility of the welfare recipients. This is an excellent incentive for parents to practice the minimal parenting skills.

Further, once children get the idea that their family may get money NOW if they perform in school, maybe it will discourage them from skipping school to go into the workforce to "provide for their families."

Originally Posted by ILG (Post 1218696)

I'm not a big fan of either of those either. But since the system is already in place, let's not make it worse, eh?

Originally Posted by Hoovie (Post 1218707)

Their burecratic existence tends to feed themselves ineffiecency.... But yeah I don't think it's a good plan to connect the grades/benefit. Now drug testing to get the benefit might be a better idea!