Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should people be required to submit to a drug screen before receiving unemployment benefits or welfa
Yes 118 65.19%
No 63 34.81%
Voters: 181. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-15-2010, 12:55 PM
 
Location: In the desert
4,049 posts, read 2,743,950 times
Reputation: 2483

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by artwomyn View Post
And you conservatives, are always griping about how you don't want government interference in our lives! Then you want to impose the most invasive program against the poor, that's possible! What hippocrites!

You're basically saying that ALL of the welfare and UI benefit recipients out there, use drugs, and thus need to be tested. You have absolutely no proof, to back this up. It's just your own unfair judgement, against people that are less fortunate than you.

And many people who collect benefits, DID save for a rainy day. But I guess it never ocurred to you, that a person can go through their savings trying to keep up with their expenses, if they're out of work for a long time. Which most people are these days, if they've lost their jobs.

You can argue and argue, but there's no way that you can justify automatically imposing drug testing on government benefit recipients, just because they collect government benefits. That's facism at it's worst. And it would move this country further along into the police state, that's it's been drifting towards since the Bush administration was in control. So it's YOUR logic, that's deeply flawed!
They will argue & argue unless or until it is THEM that have more restrictions placed against them.

They say they don't HATE the poor but, just reread through the different threads & you will see the same people posting on all of them. Just in this thread it has been said that those on welfare 'do drugs & spread their legs'.
They can say it's not hate but, the facts & their own statements prove otherwise.
They get it........but ONLY when it suits them. They are hypocrites IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-15-2010, 12:55 PM
 
Location: South Fla
9,644 posts, read 9,852,631 times
Reputation: 1942
Quote:
Originally Posted by artwomyn View Post
And how do you know that they're spending their money on drugs??? So why pick on them then, if you don't believe that all of them are spending their money on drugs??? And I just tell it like it is, whether you want ot hear it like it is or not. Guess you think that asserting my viewpoint, is an insult.

As for the other person that I called on the carpet, I have been getting personal attacks from them, for quite some time, which you know nothing about. So don't go there.
They are friends of ours

So can you please answer the question. Why should we be paying almost 400.00 a mth in Food stamps alone for a couple that has been together since their teens and dont get married on purpose because they would lose their benefits. But spend more then 100.00 a week on pot. You can avoid this all day long and your lack of answer speaks volumes.

So you can tell it like it is but if someone tells you like it is you accuse them of doing the same thing you do, a bit hypocritical if you ask me. Guess that is me calling it like it is
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,292 posts, read 20,760,181 times
Reputation: 9330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadex View Post
You have yet to answer.

Why should we give someone food stamps when they have money to spend on drugs?
.

Please explain why you single out drugs (presumably illegal drugs only) for exclusion. Why not other products that are of little or no health value? Why not exclude soft drinks and fast food?

And if you support telling welfare recipients that they cannot spend on pleasure items, why stop at illegal drugs? Why not prohibit golf, fishing or other non essential stuff?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 12:58 PM
 
4,127 posts, read 5,070,054 times
Reputation: 1621
I'm not sure what that would accomplish since addiction is considered a disability and already entitles them to all sorts of freebies. Yes your savvy local addict is subsidized! Heck, you want a cool taxpayer bought electric scooter? Get so fat you can't walk and the various agencies will equip you with all sorts of gadgets to get you to the grocery store! If you get too fat to get out of bed they'll even deliver your meals prepared and supply you with some hapless individual who'll give you sponge baths.......... I think I just threw up a little.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 01:02 PM
 
Location: South Fla
9,644 posts, read 9,852,631 times
Reputation: 1942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Please explain why you single out drugs (presumably illegal drugs only) for exclusion. Why not other products that are of little or no health value? Why not exclude soft drinks and fast food?

And if you support telling welfare recipients that they cannot spend on pleasure items, why stop at illegal drugs? Why not prohibit golf, fishing or other non essential stuff?
Is soda illegal? But I dont think they should be able to buy soda either to be honest about it. Didnt La or some where in Ca just limit fast food places? So I dont single out drugs but drugs are illegal. I think people that have money to pay for such things as " drugs" something that is illegal should be able to use that to buy food and we can use what they arent getting to help someone that really needs it

To me food stamps it meant to sustain life. Do you need a soda to do that?

Can you answer my question? Why should we be paying almost 400.00 a mth for someone that spends over 100.00 a week on pot?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 01:07 PM
 
Location: In the desert
4,049 posts, read 2,743,950 times
Reputation: 2483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_Ryder View Post
I'm not sure what that would accomplish since addiction is considered a disability and already entitles them to all sorts of freebies. Yes your savvy local addict is subsidized! Heck, you want a cool taxpayer bought electric scooter? Get so fat you can't walk and the various agencies will equip you with all sorts of gadgets to get you to the grocery store! If you get too fat to get out of bed they'll even deliver your meals prepared and supply you with some hapless individual who'll give you sponge baths.......... I think I just threw up a little.


^
artwomyn need I say more? According to this post if your heavy or your legs don't work it's because you wanted to get fat or unhealthy. It couldn't possibly be because you have an illness...no it's because they want sponge baths...LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 01:10 PM
 
21,026 posts, read 22,162,825 times
Reputation: 5941
Why are you putting these two things together?

They are two different programs that have nothing to do with each other (???)



Do YOU think those Uber-Wealthy who got huge tax breaks from Bush and continue to do so should be drug tested?


Do you think the Wall Streeters who got bailed out and received huge bonuses with OUR money should be drug tested???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 01:16 PM
 
21,026 posts, read 22,162,825 times
Reputation: 5941
Should Republican Representative Michelle Bachmann be drug tested after receiving $250,000 in Welfare Farm Subsidies? Should all the farmers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 01:18 PM
 
Location: In the desert
4,049 posts, read 2,743,950 times
Reputation: 2483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Who?Me?! View Post
Should Republican Representative Michelle Bachmann be drug tested after receiving $250,000 in Welfare Farm Subsidies? Should all the farmers?
Yes, yes & yes!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Montana
1,219 posts, read 3,171,362 times
Reputation: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Who?Me?! View Post
Should Republican Representative Michelle Bachmann be drug tested after receiving $250,000 in Welfare Farm Subsidies? Should all the farmers?
Yes, she should be drug tested and jailed! IMO

Farmers... I don't really see the need. They are after all working.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:28 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top