Why Must We Force Ben Shapiro To Explain To Us That Feeding Children Won't Help Child Hunger?

We do not deserve his patience.

All the cool states these days are implementing universal free lunch. California did it first, then Colorado and Maine, and now Minnesota and Connecticut are following suit — after realizing that they all really liked it when all kids ate free during the height of the pandemic.

But not everyone is very happy about it. Minnesota state Sen. Steve Drazkowski , for one, who doesn't know a single hungry person in all of Minnesota and is just outraged by this whole thing. Then there is Ben Shapiro, who cannot believe he has to explain to us that feeding children is not the answer to child hunger.

None

— (@)  

"If government can protect kids from the sick, radical Left, shouldn't they also protect kids from hunger? Wouldn't it make sense to strengthen food stamps and have school lunch be free since some kids are in school lunch debt?" asked a viewer who was clearly messing with him, since people who use terms like "the sick, radical left" largely do not care about feeding children who are not their own children.

BEFORE! Minnesota Republican Unable To Stop Communist Governor From Giving Kids Food 

"School lunches are not going to solve the problem of child hunger at any serious level," an exasperated and unshaven Ben Shapiro explained. "If there is a problem with children actually starving, that is a child endangerment scenario in which CPS needs to be called. if you're talking about actual child starvation, the truth is, it does not take that much money to feed a child. I know, I have three of them. You should be feeding your child before you feed yourself. It's that simple. There's a much deeper problem at work than school lunches if kids are legitimately starving."

You hear that? Feeding children is not the answer to child hunger. The answer is reporting parents to CPS.

ALSO BEFORE!  Somebody Is Stealing Children To Put In Paul Ryan Speeches! 

 Dennis Prager: Kids Should Be More Hungry 

  This is certainly an interesting take from someone who is very excited to force people to have children regardless of whether they want or can afford them. Personally, I think all states that choose to outlaw abortion should be forced to pay all expenses for all children from -9 months to 18 years old, and then also pay for them to go to college. If they want those babies so badly, then they should pay for them.

Don't think this means that Ben Shapiro is cheap, though. Far from it! Giving a child free lunch for a year costs only $670, while a year in foster care costs on average about $25,782 (likely more since the most recent study on this was done in 2011) in foster care stipends and administrative costs. Ben Shapiro is willing to spend about $25,000 a year more than it would cost to give these kids a free school lunch, which is very gracious of him. Not to mention the fact that being put into foster care can seriously affect one's future. Only about 51 percent of children who grow up in foster care graduate from high school, while only three percent will go on to graduate college. It is also estimated that "[a]mong former foster youth, one-third of all males and three-fourths of all females rely on government assistance programs." We can assume thisalso costs more per year than school lunches.

On the other hand, free school lunches have been known to lead to overall better behavior and school performance, as well as spontaneous Irene Cara-centered dance riots.

 www.youtube.com 

Child hunger is a serious problem in the United States, as 12.5 percent of children live in food insecure homes. Sure, the kids likely don't look like they belong in a commercial with Sally Struthers, but that's because parents likely are feeding their kids before they feed themselves. While these children may not be literally starving to death, there is room between that and having everything they need in which one subsidized meal could help a lot.

Free school lunches means that money is freed up to spend on food for everyone in the household, and healthier and better food at that. Maybe they have some nice chicken and vegetables instead of cereal for dinner. These are not the kind of things Ben Shapiro, who is worth somewhere between $25 and $50 million according to various shady-looking celebrity net worth sites, has to worry about or consider when it comes to his own children, but they are things that millions of other American families do have to worry about and consider.

For people like Ben Shapiro, their greatest concern is that children are going to see a drag queen or find out that racism exists (well, white children anyway). That is a luxury for rightwing elites that not every parent has, as they are far too busy worrying about what their kids are going to eat, whether they will have health care, or how they are going to afford rent or their mortgage — which is why taking this one thing off their plate is so crucial.

 Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons .

Wonkette is independent and fully funded by readers like you. Click below to tip us!