North Dakota proposal to require welfare applicants to take drug tests

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Perhaps not..... drastic decline in the caseload when the testing went into effect. The other number that is not being calculated is those that simply never applied.

Drug-Tested Welfare « DeHavelle.com

Looks to be caseload average of about 93 to 94K in the months when testing was not in affect. It's a full 10K+ less in November which was last month it was in affect.

Time to get the calculator out again. Wouldit be reasonable to assume that half of the 10K drop can be attributed to those that failed, refused or never applied?

If it's $400 in benefits that's 2 million per month.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Joe Schmoe can refuse to take the company test just like the welfare recipient. There is consequences if he does, same thing would apply to the welfare recipient.

Only if you are unable to understand the simplistic.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Let's say the test is 30 bucks.

4068*30 = $122,040

Is $400 a reasonable number for one months benefits?

1700*400 = $680,000

If they don't collect benefits for 12 months...

$8,160,000

You also have to add in what it cost to fight it in court and lose.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by pknopp

Only if you are unable to understand the simplistic.

When people reply with nothing but rude comments what that means is they have no reasonable argument to offer.

[pknopp]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

When people reply with nothing but rude comments what that means is they have no reasonable argument to offer.

An argument is made 4-5 times in a thread. One that has been offered many times in the past. That doesn't stop people from learning or acting like they do NOT know the facts.

What a private business can do and require is completely different than what the government can require and do. You and others know this but still......."well, if I have to undergo a drug test at work.........."

The two things are completely irrelevant from each other. It even works the other way.

"Yes your honor, I locked my secretary in a room with bars for years but the government does it so why can't I"?

The Constitution restricts or allows things to the government. None of it applies to a private business.