Conservatives: Not our job to feed starving Canadian children

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
In context I don't see the issue with the comment:

Clap trap from the left. Read the comment.

"Is it the government's job — my job to feed my neighbour's child? I don't think so," Moore said.
"Obviously nobody wants kids to go to school hungry..., but is that always the government's job? To be there to serve people their breakfast? Empowering families with more power and resources so they can feed their own children is I think a good thing," he said.


Moore is a numbskull for apologizing.


Yep, I was going to say he had it right the first time!
 

Zipperfish

House Member
Apr 12, 2013
3,688
0
36
Vancouver
"Business!" cried the Ghost, wringing its hands again. "Mankind was my
business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and
benevolence were all my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of
water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!"

Jacob Marley's wrods.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,371
579
113
59
Alberta
At least CBC put up the full quote. Although that didn't stop the


Sadly, he is correct. It's not a job. It's a duty of care - which he doesn't, apparently

Another one who ignores context.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,371
579
113
59
Alberta
Which part? The yes or the duty of care - like they send by the boatload overseas (thus maintaining an image they don't show here)

Tons of tax payer money gets distributed in this Country. A lot more than gets shipped overseas. You can pick at what he said, but the fact remains that throwing money at child hunger is not the answer.
 

WLDB

Senate Member
Jun 24, 2011
6,182
0
36
Ottawa
Short of buying the food and cooking it how are you going to force a crackhead or a drunk to feed their kids? Give them money and it goes to their favorite addiction not to the kids.

In a situation like that perhaps the person shouldnt have a child. Unfortunately the government doesnt do a particularly good job with crown wards either. Not as bad as a crackhead, but not a whole lot better.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,371
579
113
59
Alberta
I don't know what I find more infuriating. The hang wringing crowd who hang of every word looking for fault or the idiots who allow themselves to be pushed into bullshyte apologies.

What a phoney world we live in.

Oh won't some please think of the children.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
In a situation like that perhaps the person shouldnt have a child. Unfortunately the government doesnt do a particularly good job with crown wards either. Not as bad as a crackhead, but not a whole lot better.


That is a secondary or tertiary role of Governments. Their prime concern is enacting legislation.
 

WLDB

Senate Member
Jun 24, 2011
6,182
0
36
Ottawa
That is a secondary or tertiary role of Governments. Their prime concern is enacting legislation.

I'm aware of that. Its still a role they play though. Different countries have different ideas on what governments should and shouldn't do.
 

Christianna

Electoral Member
Dec 18, 2012
868
0
16
At least no one here said that people on welfare have more children to get more welfare. A lot of American right wingers think that. My suggestion is give people on welfare free birth control.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
I'm aware of that. Its still a role they play though. Different countries have different ideas on what governments should and shouldn't do.


You have that right, they have a responsibility to protect children, but I think it should be at "arms length" farm the actual duties out to a capable committee. I'm not sure if anyone has noticed but the prime roll of many parents has changed drastically in the past forty years, from parenting to something else. A lot to do possibly with procuring more money to buy more junk they don't need.
Just the money spent on Xmas now has gone up far more exponentially than the cost of living. Where $5 or $10 used to be a reasonable amount to spend on a child's Xmas gift, now for some kids it's in the $thousands.
 

Retired_Can_Soldier

The End of the Dog is Coming!
Mar 19, 2006
11,371
579
113
59
Alberta
If you've got all the answers, share 'em. Kids can't eat money.

I don't have all the answers. If I had all the answers I wouldn't be working 60 - 70 hours a week to take care of my own.

Perhaps if we spent less time trying to trip up our political opponents with word play and concentrated on some of the things Moore actually said we'd find more solutions.
 

Sal

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 29, 2007
17,135
33
48
I don't know how to solve the problem here. The fact is, children do go hungry. It's all well and good to say "not my problem" but be in a school where there are kids who are hungry and neglected and see how you feel looking at the ragged clothes and big eyes and bruised bodies.

On the other hand the school where I currently work teaches English as a Second Language. These people are right off the boat. We provide daycare for the tots while they learn English. The weather is freezing. They come to school sometimes in sandals but their kids have snowsuits on and are chunky. Why is that?

No child should have to suffer because their parent is incapable (mentally, emotionally or physically) of putting food into their mouth or clothes on their back but Immigrants with no stoves in their living quarters seem to make it happen.

I think the problem is multi-layered.

Poverty does affect children and woman more harshly than any other demographic. From the article:
the cold reality for one in seven malnourished Canadian children in poverty is that very little has changed in the past 20 years despite unanimous pre-election federal motions in 1989 to end poverty by the year 2000, and a renewal of them in 2009.
Whose responsibility is it to feed a hungry child?