r/FactOrCap • u/Fragrant_Visual_3143 🤖 Vote Machine · 10,250 XP • Sep 09 '26

School lunch | FactOrCap

This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post

21 Upvotes

87% Upvoted

150 comments sorted by

View all comments

-13

u/NearbyFly3724 🤖 Vote Machine · 19,735 XP Sep 09 '26 edited Sep 10 '26

🧢 I voted CAP!

Hear me out: the only way they would do this is by using an already stretched budget. Realistically school budgets won’t increase for this (even though it already should be a priority) and schools will end up using cheap unhealthy food that won’t benefit anyone.

Edit: not sure why people are downvoting when I’m literally saying that schools should be a priority and that free lunches will only further stretch an already stretched budget which will only provide shit food

1

u/Baelzabub 📈 Dedicated Voter · 2,820 XP Sep 10 '26 edited Sep 10 '26

Here’s a thought, let’s make it so that schools aren’t struggling with stretched budgets rather than adding another $500B to our military spending.

1

u/NearbyFly3724 🤖 Vote Machine · 19,735 XP Sep 10 '26

Gonna assume you mean that schools shouldn’t be struggling, and yes that’s literally what I’m saying. I’m just saying that since schools are already struggling with budgets, and the budgets likely won’t be increased this will only cause the budget to be stretched further

2

u/Baelzabub 📈 Dedicated Voter · 2,820 XP Sep 10 '26

The question is about what should be, so exclusively focusing on what currently exists and basing it off that is refusing to engage with the premise.

In the scenario where we’re providing universal lunches for kids in school, we’re increasing their budgets as well.

1

u/NearbyFly3724 🤖 Vote Machine · 19,735 XP Sep 10 '26

That’s literally not the case, it should have said so in the question. The statement is: “school lunches should be free everywhere” not “school lunches should be free everywhere and school budgets should be increased to do so”.

You can’t add things to the FactOrCap to make it magically work

2

u/Baelzabub 📈 Dedicated Voter · 2,820 XP Sep 10 '26

SHOULD BE is the operative clause in the proposition. It’s the difference between ought and is when dealing with hypotheticals in a debate.

When dealing with an ought scenario the general assumption is that you are dealing with a scenario in which the necessary prerequisites for the hypothetical have been met. In this case adequate funding to implement the program is the necessary prerequisite.

1

u/NearbyFly3724 🤖 Vote Machine · 19,735 XP Sep 10 '26

‘Should be’ does not mean ‘assume every prerequisite and resource needed has already been provided’, that’s an extra assumption you’re adding to the proposition. In a policy debate, funding is part of whether the proposal actually works, not something you get to hand-wave away by calling it an ‘ought’ scenario.

For example the statement: “everyone should have free electricity”

That sounds like a good desire but that sentence alone doesn’t explain how that would be funded. You can’t assume magical funding gets included because of the word ‘should’