Some dweeb nobody knows whines about food in America

[Darat]

I'm glad. But it's not going to happen here.

...snip...

As many people here also said - local authorities claimed they wouldn't be able to afford it, unions complained it was asking too much from their staff and so on. Yet he did spearhead a change.

 

[Matthew Best]

It's going to be difficult, so let's not bother.

Same as reforming the health system, if you ask me.

 

[Darat]

It's going to be difficult, so let's not bother.

Same as reforming the health system, if you ask me.

Sadly that does seem to be the attitude that some folk are putting forward, but (as I may have mentioned before) the exact same negativity was heard in the UK yet a change has been made.

I have been very pleasantly surprised that he was able to spearhead (because of course this was not him alone) a change back to locally prepared fresh food from a varied menu for the school kids. It's been a nice counterpoint to all the negativity of the "Oh there's nothing we can do.." attitude that we hear so often.

 

[Checkmite]

Plant material= anything you can grow in soil. Herbs, flowers, spice plants, fruits, vegetables.

This isn't an exercise in you have to grow your own food in order to eat. It is one suggestion, that is actually working in schools, to get kids interested in food. It isn't just your textbook health class of what nutrition is. Kids like learning via hands on methods. If you could hands on get them into the garden, growing things, it could lead into a appreciation for food. If it is an integrated part of learning then there are many different disciplines that can be involved other than what's for lunch. Even if a plant dies or doesn't grow at all, it's good fodder for learning.

In first grade, everybody got to grow a lima bean plant in a plastic cup. I'm sure lots of schools already do that.

 

[Checkmite]

As many people here also said - local authorities claimed they wouldn't be able to afford it, unions complained it was asking too much from their staff and so on. Yet he did spearhead a change.

See, right where that "snip" is, there was a direct question that I asked you.

 

[Doghouse Reilly]

My issue is that "locally grown" is just one of those buzz catch phrases that sounds good but is essentially meaningless. It's impossible from a practical point of view out here because 95%+ of the farms in California are now owned by huge corporations that would laugh at anyone trying to make small orders for some school or local farmers market. You want their stuff? Fine, order it in huge batches from their central processing facility nine months to a year ahead of time like everyone else.

Now we do have Farmers Markets but they have the exact same stuff as the supermarkets since they have to use the same suppliers. So, in essence, the only way a school could use locally grown food would be for the school to buy some land and open it's own farm. Which I don't see happening because viable farm land does not come up for sale much unless some developer offers an obscene amount of money so he can build homes on it.

I don't understand this, as I've lived in California for most of my life and have never seen a farmer's market selling the same stuff you get in the supermarket. It's always smaller farmers bringing their goods to the market because they find it more profitable than trying to compete with the big corporations. Most of the time the quality is vastly superior to anything in the grocery store. Maybe the part of California you are in is very, very different, but the farmer's markets I have been to (at least two dozen different ones, primarily in Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and San Francisco) are fabulous, with an astonish variety of high quality, reasonably priced produce, meat, dairy, and eggs.
I especially don't understand your statement that the farmer's markets "have to use the same suppliers." What did you mean by that?

 

[Darat]

See, right where that "snip" is, there was a direct question that I asked you.

And? It was a pointless question that was reaffirming your view that this can't happen in the USA.

 

[alysten]

In first grade, everybody got to grow a lima bean plant in a plastic cup. I'm sure lots of schools already do that.

Yes and in my class we grew lettuce, peas, beans and carrots. Then when everything was grown, we learned how to make a salad. It was supplemented with bread, milk, chicken and some fruit. 4th grade science and health class was never so much fun. And this was in the mid-70s when salad didn't occupy the pedestal it does today.

 

[tesscaline]

Well, I'm only talking about things locally. I wouldn't presume to know how things are elsewhere.

Then why are you responding the way you are to statements that have been made towards the US school food system as a whole?

If it's November then they probably come from the Southern Hemisphere.

Indeed. They do. And what toll does that take upon natural resources? Oh right, you don't know, but you're happy to have a BLT in January anyway.

Well, fine. It's nice that they have the luxury to be able to do that.

Luxury? You seem to think that such an endeavor is more expensive. There's nothing luxurious about saving money while increasing quality and diversity.

I do know that I am thankful for globalization allowing me to have a BLT in January.

So you don't have any clue what the impact of not buying locally grown/produced products are, but you're going to bash it anyway?

That I do know since my dad was the union head for that department at my high school. They contract with Schwans and Swanson who provide bulk delivery to large institutions like schools and prisons. They procure their food from multinational suppliers in large batch orders that they put out a year ahead of time. This allows them to hedge prices in case a devastating frost hits Chile or something.

Why are we discussing your high school as if it is representative of the US elementary school system as a whole? From what you've said in this thread, your high school doesn't sound like it's the norm at all. And since it's a high school, and not an elementary school, it's not really relevant as high schools take an entirely different approach to feeding their students than elementary schools do, and elementary schools are the things being discussed.

I'm just wondering how a school in California can get locally produced produce. I mean it might be possible if they find one of the few family owned farms left but it would be super expensive as the exorbitant prices in what few real farmers markets that do exist out here can attest (farmers market prices are two to three times the supermarket price).

Gee... I dunno... The same way restaurants do? Where on earth are you coming up with all these misconceptions?

I'm really starting to doubt your experience with regards to California's produce availability. Maybe it might be the way you describe in your own personal location, but California as a whole has TONS of farmer's markets with sub-supermarket prices. I lived in California for over 20 years, in both the bay area and the central valley. Never EVER had a problem finding locally grown produce. Never EVER had a hard time finding farmer's markets. And that's assuming that to get locally grown produce you have to go to a farmer's market, which you don't.

It's really starting to seem as if your whole objection to "locally grown" produce is nothing more than an argument from incredulity based upon painting with a broad brush based upon an incredibly insufficient sample size with a couple of flawed premises thrown in just for fun.

Eh, like all the other non-poor kids I had to pack a lunch so I don't really know if there is a difference. I do know the lunches I packed for myself were always balanced and healthy.

See, this is again something that smacks of you having no idea about school lunch programs in general. Not only poor kids eat school lunches. Your school may have had a prohibition against anyone other than poor children buying school lunch (though, I highly doubt that's actually the case and it's more likely a misconception on your part), but the majority of public schools don't have that at all. There are sometimes summer lunch programs for when school is not in session that require a certain household income, but that doesn't apply to the normal school session lunch. Anyone who can pay for one can buy one. It's just that the poor kids get it for free, or reduced price.

When I was a kid (admittedly a long time ago, but I just want to prove a point here), it was the poor kids that brought packed lunches, and the rich kids that got to buy school lunches, because at that time there was no price reduction program on school lunches in my district (there was on milk, but not on the actual meal). If you couldn't afford the $1.75 for lunch, you had to bring one. So I always had a bag lunch in elementary school, except for the few times a year when I got the "special treat" of being able to buy lunch -- and those few times a year were planned out by my mother so as to fit her budget.

My son's current school (and his two previous schools, in vastly different districts and even different states) not only has free and reduced price meals for children of low income families, but even has a food program that sends home food for the weekends with children. And still, any child can buy school lunch, it isn't restricted just to "poor kids". Parent's pay for school lunch for any number of reasons -- the main one being that they're busy working full time (if not double shifts), and packing a lunch just isn't a priority.

You see? Your anecdotes about your high school aren't the end all be all of how things are in the US school food system. You might want to stop acting as if they are.

 

[Travis]

I don't understand this, as I've lived in California for most of my life and have never seen a farmer's market selling the same stuff you get in the supermarket. It's always smaller farmers bringing their goods to the market because they find it more profitable than trying to compete with the big corporations. Most of the time the quality is vastly superior to anything in the grocery store. Maybe the part of California you are in is very, very different, but the farmer's markets I have been to (at least two dozen different ones, primarily in Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and San Francisco) are fabulous, with an astonish variety of high quality, reasonably priced produce, meat, dairy, and eggs.
I especially don't understand your statement that the farmer's markets "have to use the same suppliers." What did you mean by that?

In the Modesto/Tuolumne County area, outside of one market that sells surplus produce, all the farmers markets are aimed at yuppies and cost much more than you would find at the supermarket. These markets have very small dedicated farms (all organic too) since that's the only way to procure such items outside of the huge corporate farms that won't sell to farmers markets.

Then why are you responding the way you are to statements that have been made towards the US school food system as a whole?

I've specifically stated that I was only talking about California in all my posts.

Indeed. They do. And what toll does that take upon natural resources? Oh right, you don't know, but you're happy to have a BLT in January anyway.

It is apparently cost effective since it is very commonly done. But before you chastise me for not having exact figures I would like to know if you have any.

Luxury? You seem to think that such an endeavor is more expensive. There's nothing luxurious about saving money while increasing quality and diversity.

My contention is that buying local may be more expensive and that is my only objection to it.

Why are we discussing your high school as if it is representative of the US elementary school system as a whole? From what you've said in this thread, your high school doesn't sound like it's the norm at all. And since it's a high school, and not an elementary school, it's not really relevant as high schools take an entirely different approach to feeding their students than elementary schools do, and elementary schools are the things being discussed.

The high school and elementary school were in the same district and thus shared policies and resources. Both bought from the same suppliers and still do.

Gee... I dunno... The same way restaurants do? Where on earth are you coming up with all these misconceptions?

I know of no local restaurant the uses locally procured foods. They all use distributors like Sysco.

I'm really starting to doubt your experience with regards to California's produce availability. Maybe it might be the way you describe in your own personal location, but California as a whole has TONS of farmer's markets with sub-supermarket prices. I lived in California for over 20 years, in both the bay area and the central valley. Never EVER had a problem finding locally grown produce. Never EVER had a hard time finding farmer's markets. And that's assuming that to get locally grown produce you have to go to a farmer's market, which you don't.

I've been to farmers markets and was unimpressed. Their prices were through the roof and everything was super-organic-grown-with-Springsteen-music-playing-through-speakers-feel-goodness.

See, this is again something that smacks of you having no idea about school lunch programs in general. Not only poor kids eat school lunches. Your school may have had a prohibition against anyone other than poor children buying school lunch (though, I highly doubt that's actually the case and it's more likely a misconception on your part), but the majority of public schools don't have that at all.

Well, there was such a prohibition, of sorts, at my school. They only had so many resources, paid by the state, and had to stretch them. The state only provided for their "assistance program" so that was all the school did (they did often have some leftovers so a certain amount of kids could just buy a lunch after the "assistance kids" had gotten theirs. $2.75 was the price IIRC). Even at that the school board tried to shut it down on multiple occasions. Three times (twice in the 90's, the last time in 2002), before my dad retired, he had to fight to keep the cafeteria staff from being laid off and the lunch room being shut down. Each time they agreed to keep it if expenses were cut. Mostly they kept cutting down on menu variety.

When I was a kid (admittedly a long time ago, but I just want to prove a point here), it was the poor kids that brought packed lunches, and the rich kids that got to buy school lunches, because at that time there was no price reduction program on school lunches in my district (there was on milk, but not on the actual meal). If you couldn't afford the $1.75 for lunch, you had to bring one. So I always had a bag lunch in elementary school, except for the few times a year when I got the "special treat" of being able to buy lunch -- and those few times a year were planned out by my mother so as to fit her budget.

Completely opposite from my own experience. I guess this shows the variability in how different school districts run things.

My son's current school (and his two previous schools, in vastly different districts and even different states) not only has free and reduced price meals for children of low income families, but even has a food program that sends home food for the weekends with children.

Wow, I've never heard of such a thing.

And still, any child can buy school lunch, it isn't restricted just to "poor kids". Parent's pay for school lunch for any number of reasons -- the main one being that they're busy working full time (if not double shifts), and packing a lunch just isn't a priority.

Well, my mom worked at my elementary school (she taught 1st grade) and my dad was at my high school so they were always around but they made me pack my own lunches.

You see? Your anecdotes about your high school aren't the end all be all of how things are in the US school food system. You might want to stop acting as if they are.

I never pretended they were. I was only trying to illustrate that a "one size fits all" solution might not work because things work differently at different schools in different parts of the country. Would this idea work in Alaska? I have no idea.

 

[Checkmite]

And? It was a pointless question that was reaffirming your view that this can't happen in the USA.

Firstly, if my position IS that "this can't happen in the USA", any request for data which might or might not reaffirm that position cannot be "pointless".

Secondly, refusing to answer a question because you think the answer might reaffirm my view is pretty much the same as conceding that my view has at least some validity.

Come on - it's a very simple question. How much did your tax increase when your local schools started employing chefs and preparing fresh foods in this manner? A lot? Did it increase at all?

 

[tesscaline]

I've specifically stated that I was only talking about California in all my posts.

And yet, your anecdotes don't even apply to all of California -- you are still extrapolating from your own personal experience and an entire state with what happens in your single county. And you were doing it in response to statements made by someone about the entire US as a whole. Do you not see how this is counterproductive, and even fallacious?

It is apparently cost effective since it is very commonly done. But before you chastise me for not having exact figures I would like to know if you have any.

Appealing to common practice. Just because something is commonly done does not make it right, cost effective, or correct.

You're the one making claims here, you're the one who needs to be able to back them up.

My contention is that buying local may be more expensive and that is my only objection to it.

Do you have any actual evidence (i.e. not just your own anecdotes which suffer from the insufficient sample size fallacy) to back up your contention?

The high school and elementary school were in the same district and thus shared policies and resources. Both bought from the same suppliers and still do.

So, the elementary school also had a Taco Bell and full salad bar on campus? And even if they did, this is representative of the rest of the state of California how?

I know of no local restaurant the uses locally procured foods. They all use distributors like Sysco.

Just because you don't know about them doesn't mean they don't exist. Again, the comments of yours that I was replying to were directed at "California" -- that's the context you insist they had, after all -- and how you don't see how purchasing local produce is possible in California. You are arguing from incredulity and an insufficient sample size.

I've been to farmers markets and was unimpressed. Their prices were through the roof and everything was super-organic-grown-with-Springsteen-music-playing-through-speakers-feel-goodness.

And why are you limiting "local produce" to what can be obtained from farmer's markets?

Well, there was such a prohibition, of sorts, at my school. They only had so many resources, paid by the state, and had to stretch them. The state only provided for their "assistance program" so that was all the school did (they did often have some leftovers so a certain amount of kids could just buy a lunch after the "assistance kids" had gotten theirs. $2.75 was the price IIRC). Even at that the school board tried to shut it down on multiple occasions. Three times (twice in the 90's, the last time in 2002), before my dad retired, he had to fight to keep the cafeteria staff from being laid off and the lunch room being shut down. Each time they agreed to keep it if expenses were cut. Mostly they kept cutting down on menu variety.

Then your school district is a huge exception to the general rule in terms of providing lunches to students, and you shouldn't be using your experience as any measure of what is possible for the rest of the state, let alone the rest of the country.

Completely opposite from my own experience. I guess this shows the variability in how different school districts run things.

Exactly my point. You are extrapolating your own personal experience as if it should be representative of every other school in the state, and doing so in a conversation that is not just about that state, but about the nation as a whole.

Wow, I've never heard of such a thing.

Now you have.

Well, my mom worked at my elementary school (she taught 1st grade) and my dad was at my high school so they were always around but they made me pack my own lunches.

That's nice. Not all children have the ability to make their own lunches, and even if they did, not all families keep the makings for said lunches on hand for any number of reasons -- working double shifts and not having time to grocery shop being one.

I never pretended they were. I was only trying to illustrate that a "one size fits all" solution might not work because things work differently at different schools in different parts of the country. Would this idea work in Alaska? I have no idea.

So... you were trying to illustrate that a suggestion which was never made isn't viable? I don't see anyone saying that a "one size fits all" solution should be implemented. A change in ideology has been proposed, not a 12 step program to the perfect school lunch. Your objection to that ideology has come across as nothing but an ill-educated knee-jerk hissy fit because you don't like farmer's markets. If my interpretation is incorrect, and you actually have an objection based on something solid and quantifiable, perhaps you might wish to provide evidence of that solid and quantifiable thing instead of pouring out high school nostalgia stories.

 

[Darat]

Firstly, if my position IS that "this can't happen in the USA", any request for data which might or might not reaffirm that position cannot be "pointless".

Secondly, refusing to answer a question because you think the answer might reaffirm my view is pretty much the same as conceding that my view has at least some validity.

...snip...

No it doesn't.

Come on - it's a very simple question. How much did your tax increase when your local schools started employing chefs and preparing fresh foods in this manner? A lot? Did it increase at all?

One they didn't employ chefs and and I think that the central government in England had to commit something like an additional 250 million pounds over a few years to help fund the changes.

 

[Darat]

It seems it was something like £240 million, for those of you wondering how change can and did happen here is an article from 2006: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2006/jun/25/schools.uk

 

[themusicteacher]

I know I'm getting in late on this conversation but:

I a watch the Food Network...a lot; I have no idea who Jamie Oliver is. I'd say that, in America, Bobby Flay or Rachel Ray are probably the most recognized TV chefs.

When reading about what he is trying to do, I can't help bu think of it's parallels with music education in schools. We can't stop kids from listening to Lady GaGa or the re-packaged, suburban white-boy friendly hip-hop but we can offer them alternatives and help by making valid comparisons and contrasts, just like we can't get them to stop eating sugary or fatty foods. Those two things (Lady GaGa et al and sugary, fatty foods) provide instant gratification, are pre-packaged and easy to access and pack a whole lot of superficial fluff that lights our brain up for short amounts of time then leaves us wanting more a short time later. Do they nourish our mind or body? Slightly, but not on a sustainable or healthy level. Do they taste good? Hell yes they do! Do they provide any satisfaction? Temporarily.

Again, we can't force kids to change but we can certainly show that there is something better (more satisfying) out there. Now I'll wait for everyone to tell me that music is simply a "matter of taste" and that Lady GaGa is one of the greatest "artists" to walk the earth.

 

[Worm]

Just to mention that I recently visited South Africa, and at many of the township schools I visited they were growing a proportion of their own food (not sure exactly how much) for use in school meals.



Partly this is from necessity because the funding they get from government is pretty minimal, but it involves children in the whole process, gives them an understanding of where food comes from and how it is produced, and they get some nice tasty meals at the end of it. Win-win in my opinion.

We could certainly learn lessons from some of the things they are doing.

 

[Matthew Best]

It seems it was something like £240 million, for those of you wondering how change can and did happen here is an article from 2006: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2006/jun/25/schools.uk

Good article, thanks for posting it.

 

[Rolfe]

So how many cows is the student going to have to milk and butcher to learn about that part of the process - and will it be enough to feed him for the aforementioned time period?

There are some problems with that.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

How much did your tax increase when your local schools started employing chefs and preparing fresh foods in this manner? A lot? Did it increase at all?

I notice Darat still hasn't answered the main thrust of your question.

He's right that schools didn't start employing chefs. They used the existing staff, with new training as necessary. The older members of staff were mostly pleased about the change, because they hadn't liked their food preparation role being taken away in the first place.

I am unaware of any tax increase at all having resulted from this redistribution of the budget.

Rolfe.

 

[Darat]

I notice Darat still hasn't answered the main thrust of your question.

...snip...

I notice you didn't finish that sentence, which should have continued with "apart from providing the amount of extra money the government had to provide and providing a link to an article that explained how the scheme was funded and was actually implemented and rolled out in many areas, including figures on the exact increase per pupil in many of those areas".