posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 04:42 PM
I'm sorry, I lost the plot at 40 year old pink cookie, calories or no. Three different jokes tried to fire from the same neuron simultaneously.
It is unfortunate that the law can be so inflexible towards small institutions and completely unwilling to tackle people who package things that
aren't technically food as food, but any step away from the current school climate of treating children as a captive market and upselling them while
they are away from parental supervision is positive.
There will always be pink cookies, and they can be had at better quality and prices than any school will ever be capable of offering. Take
responsibility for your child, send the little tyke a proper meal with a treat that you chose for them because you wanted to make them happy. They'll
thank you for it. Don't sensationalize the fact that you can't just lay 3 bucks on the counter and let him fend for himself in a heavily exploited
The way I see it, if the government is going to require children to be turned over to their care on a daily basis (which is highly questionable
anyway) then they have a duty to exemplify the responsibility that they are constantly preaching to the masses- they should be providing the most
beneficial nutrition and nothing else at the absolute best price possible, no upsells, no frills, here's your green veggie and your starch and your
meat in appropriate proportion, sit the hell down and eat it and tell your parents that you don't like eating right and want a bag full of cookies
instead of lunch money tomorrow... then we'll probably place a phone call to your parents just to be sure you haven't pulled a fast one if by some
miracle you actually do show up with a bag of cookies in lieu of nutrition, because you know what the reasonable answer really is.