Complaints are mounting against the new Michelle Obama instigated federal lunch program for schools Kindergarten through High School. Lunches cost more money (25 cents compared to 20 per plate) and provide children with less food - something that has already become a problem with teens and athletes.  This of course gets our collective ire raised as the government once again insists that it knows what's best for all of us, and it will force us to comply whether we like it or not.Under the current system that has been instituted, many staples have been removed or altered so substantially that they are simply not appetizing to students. I've included a handy JPG (click for larger version) here to compare.If you were a child or teen would most of those look or sound appetizing to you? No, of course not. These are meals that fall into the absolute most hippie, Whole Foods market shopping demographic I have ever seen. And yes, I do occasionally shop at Whole Foods and I have a very wide food palette. But for the government to make these sweeping changes and institute meals into schools that maybe 10% of the population would ever eat on a regular basis is absurd.The argument from the food gestapo side is that the children are provided enough to eat and if they don't eat it.

"One thing I think we need to keep in mind as kids say they're still hungry is that many children aren't used to eating fruits and vegetables at home, much less at school. So it's a change in what they are eating. If they are still hungry, it's that they are not eating all the food that's being offered," USDA Deputy Undersecretary Janey Thornton was quoted as saying.

Yes and no. While the food may meet the "required" nutritional value (with caloric counts that have been drastically reduced to curb childhood obesity), anyone who has ever tried to eat half of the food on that menu can attest that it is not filling. Certain foods are on menus because they are "fillers." They are starchy foods that will stop hunger pangs and get people through the day without feeling like they are starving. These menus provide no filler foods and kids that eat them irregularly will literally be in pain throughout the day because their systems aren't used to eating this type of meal. Of course on top of that, it tastes terrible compared to the old meals and it's not the type of food they get at home, nor desire. Thus they flat out aren't eating it.There is also a problem that is raised for students that require higher calorie intake due to athletics, which burn calories and include longer activity days  - they just aren't getting enough food.Let me nip one argument in the bud here as well. Please don't say that students can just bring lunches from home if they don't like it, because that isn't an economic option to many children/families. Over 31 million children were enlisted in the government free lunch program as of 2011 and that number is only going up. Think of it as food stamps for kids. So their only option is what is put in front of them. (UPDATE: I am adding this in here after seeing some comments - I do NOT advocate for government providing a free lunch program. I simply include this paragraph to cut off another potential argument. Like it or not, 31 million kids are enrolled in this program.)One interesting thing that has cropped up is underground black markets in schools for foods that are outside the provided norms, such as a black market in chocolate syrup that has popped up at one school. There is little doubt that students will bring more foods to school to sell as this goes on - I know I'd be ordering pizzas into the parking lot and making some ducats during recess.Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!