I am just pointing out that you are a myopic prick, I am not trying to convince you of anything, I wouldn't bother, you'll learn on your own or you wont, because you are either too ignorant and/or too insulated. It's not about the fact that "Everyone can make $10 in a month," it about disposable income, the diminishing relative value of a dollar, and one's ability to objectively assess the limitations of others in a reasonable and sensitive manner. You know, the way we expect our social services, public education being perhaps the pinnacle of, to be able to do.

Is the article, "sensationalist," obvi, not the fucking point. Is this circumstance fucked, absolutely. This wasn't about choice, and market choice shouldn't be involved in this particular equation anyway. This isn't even like a book fair, where the poor kids didn't have money to buy resources that were being offered, if not pushed, that day. This was an exclusionary event during school hours, if they wanted to do this, the tasteful thing to do, which would not be detrimental to EVERYONE'S education (as a school teacher I can attest, a students time = a teachers time = a public resource, bought and paid for; that student sitting in an auditorium seeing old Disney movies rather than learning math, reading, science, and civics is expensive.[period for emphasis]), is to have either an after school or out-of-school event. Not segregate the school for an unequal "reward," the spoils of which are prob'ly outside the typical purview of typical administrative regulation.

What this sounds like to me is a greedy administration taking advantage of a captive audience rather than preform their duties as public servants. And fucking with some poor kids idea as to how they ought to be treated by the Gov't - which is to say, impartially.