Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you don't care about civil rights to privacy for welfare recipients? I'm not a welfare recipient myself, I just think drug tests are a disgusting invasion of privacy. Plus they stem from drug laws themselves, which are fascist.
Additionally, I care about not spending taxpayer money on lab tests for every single welfare recipient. Everyone should at least agree with me on this point.
I don't !
Since I'm not a fan of welfare, I will gladly have the govt spend money on drug tests to insure people who are using drugs don't recieve welfare checks.
Morrison County hired a welfare fraud investigator a few years ago.
Many questioned the wisdom of spending money on that.
In his first year, the fraud he uncovered was more than double his good fulltime salary and benefits. After another year, as fraud cases dropped, they decided that it was still worth it cuz the fraud he uncovered was still more than his salary/benefits and the real welfare cost savings was the deterent that they had a full time investigator in their county.
Yes, sometimes spending money can actually save money.
It's us, the taxpayers, money.
what if they don't use drugs but they spend tax payer's money on porn, beer and lottery tickets? I bet that drugs are not at the top of the list of things we wish welfare recipients didn't spend our money on. but getting back to the original question ,No but I think some welfare recipients are too dumb to challenge a drug test and take it to the supreme court.
Last edited by thriftylefty; 06-02-2010 at 09:06 AM..
when porn,beer,and lottery tickets are illegal, then I will agree.
what if they : cheat on their taxes, run stop signs, drive over the speed limit, illegal tags, no car insurance, park in Handicap zones, steal, pedophiles , rapist, assaults, battery, bigamist, Why stop at just the drug users why not clean the welfare rolls up and only allow upstanding law abiding citizens to get assistance?, Why not like the federal student loans force males receiving aid to register for the draft if they are of the proper age?
I would be more inclined to require any one on government aid to be enrolled in some educational institution for a GED, or Vocational training. I would also require the social worker to monitor and report the school progress of the children in the families, Maybe a paid school liaison like they do with kids who are taken out of the home. And if your kids are not doing well or regularly attending you loose your benefits
Should public assistance be cut off or disallowed to any person who fails a mandatory drug test? Would such a plan create more problems than it solves?
Would it simply drive a stake into a monster, but miss the heart?
The war on drugs does nothing to reduce drug use, it simply inflates the cost of drug marketing, with public welfare paying the increment. But then, the billionaire drug lords are spending their money, on bling and real estate and maybe even equities, putting it back into the economy, and the collapse of the illegal drug trade could itself trigger a recession.
If we took all drug users off welfare, they would need to get their money elsewhere, and unless our economy magically creates 20 or 30 million new jobs and hires the chronically irresponsible to do them, they will then have to use criminal means to get the money to live on, not even counting the money to buy inflated underworld drugs. So the response is for everyone to arm himself against these desperate people, and kill them by the millions when they attack, finally pouring boiling oil on them when they cross the moat. How does that advance the principle of civilization?
Why just people on public assistance?
Why not people that request college loans?
Or federally-backed mortgages?
Or even people that want to business w/ the government?
And would people that are given false "positive" result get to sue the government for that?
Here's a question...why bother?
If people are getting high...then how would testing them do anything to stop them?
Requiring initial drug testing would mean continued random drug testing. One thing drug users know how to do is pass a urine test, not to mention there is a lot of abuse of prescribed meds these days. What about alcoholics, do they get a free pass bc its legal? So, what happens after they test positive and have children, are they reported to CPS and monitored? Is there an obligation to help these ppl, or does the road dead end there?
Should public assistance be cut off or disallowed to any person who fails a mandatory drug test? Would such a plan create more problems than it solves?
Would it simply drive a stake into a monster, but miss the heart?
The war on drugs does nothing to reduce drug use, it simply inflates the cost of drug marketing, with public welfare paying the increment. But then, the billionaire drug lords are spending their money, on bling and real estate and maybe even equities, putting it back into the economy, and the collapse of the illegal drug trade could itself trigger a recession.
If we took all drug users off welfare, they would need to get their money elsewhere, and unless our economy magically creates 20 or 30 million new jobs and hires the chronically irresponsible to do them, they will then have to use criminal means to get the money to live on, not even counting the money to buy inflated underworld drugs. So the response is for everyone to arm himself against these desperate people, and kill them by the millions when they attack, finally pouring boiling oil on them when they cross the moat. How does that advance the principle of civilization?
Working people abuse drugs?Guess that is why every so often i gave urine-breath samples.Have you ever been innocent of something and treated as if you are guilty? I felt violated,like i did something wrong knowing i wasn't guilty of any crime and still sweated it out....you are talking about my livelyhood.What about false positives or a redo...the cost to the company in money time lost because of this test...personally this killed half my day if i had to go somewhere.They also showed up at the job site in a WINABAGO trailer you had to autograph your sample,the bag,shipping box it was air freighted to be in the lab within 24 hrs a multitude of tests at this lab[SMITH-KLINE]... it isn't cheap.These bastards even had the gull to tell me i had a vitamin deficiency in certain areas...how can you not feel violated.If you want these govt supported people to go out every day and clean up the parks,streets,alleys for these free hand outs i'am all for that ....good luck trying to do that the Libs called that slavery i call welfare or SSI robbing the taxpayer....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
