EPTFlorida to drug test for welfare - Page 18
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
| ||
|
PolSC2
United States634 Posts
On June 10 2011 23:59 Klipsys wrote: While I agree with you, the legislation simply isn't fully justifiable otherwise there would be no discussion to the contrary. I can argue rather successfully that this would wind up costing the state more money, and possible screw people out of their benefits. Let's be frank I don't really care for most unemployed people, it's the mom with 6 kids who now has stand in line to piss in a cup twice a week to barely feed them. True. A cousin on my Wife's side of the family is exactly like what you just described. She is on welfare, her boyfriend is on welfare, and they keep popping out kids. It's frustratingly sad. | ||
|
Baarn
United States2702 Posts
On June 10 2011 23:59 Klipsys wrote: If you haven't already (for whatever reason) please READ the article and THE THREAD before you post Few things to point out. 1) Drug test's aren't free, thus "saving tax payer money" is at best a misnomer, and more appropriately a lie (or marketing). Drug testing thousands of people is not going to save anyone money. It's probably cheaper to let them use drugs. 2) Not everyone on welfare does drugs. A large portion perhaps (unknowable), but never the less, many of these people receiving benefits have children who have committed no crime except to be born to the (apparently) wrong parents. 3) Drug testing parolee's and ex-cons doesn't stop them from using/beating the test, and neither will this 4) And to the quoted poster, I suggest you read 1984 before spouting such off ridiculous non-sense. Remember it's better to say nothing, and have others assume you a fool, than open your mouth and remove all doubt. While I agree with you, the legislation simply isn't fully justifiable otherwise there would be no discussion to the contrary. I can argue rather successfully that this would wind up costing the state more money, and possible screw people out of their benefits. Let's be frank I don't really care for most unemployed people, it's the mom with 6 kids who now has stand in line to piss in a cup twice a week to barely feed them. I disagree $42 is much cheaper than just handing out drug addicts checks that are at minimum 5 times that amount. Ones that claim children and it goes up exponentially. They way I see it though is that this is good for Florida. With a demand of 150,000+ recipients needing to get drug tested opens up employment opportunities for people that live there. You can take the Certified Professional Collections Trainer course for about $150. it's a 7 hour course. It opens opportunities to get a job making over 30k a year. I don't think this is a bad situation for anyone. | ||
|
Billyray
Canada49 Posts
On June 11 2011 00:10 Amestir wrote: This scares me. Why do people care so little for thier fellow men? As a resident of a western country you have the right that the government will help you when you lose your income. Whatever you want to do with that money is your business. It's strange to me that people from a country that generaly holds freemdom high as one of the greatest goods agrees to laws like this which directly surpress freedom. Do you lose your right to do what you want when you use drugs? Pretty much the whole Western world thinks that welfare is a right, while the US and huge chunks of Canada see it as a privilege. Social solidarity isn't as engraved in the mentalities over here, so you have ridiculous legislations that will cost the taxpayers money to appeal to the sentiment that people on welfare, since they are living on the government dime, should be treated like second class citizens because they are supposedly lazy bums that universally game the system. The same people will argue in favour of smaller government when it applies to them mind you (taxes, health care, etc.): can't trust the government to give us free health care, they'll run it into the ground, but they can trust the governement to drug test hundred of thousands of people without making a mistake, all the while saving money. Yeah right. This has nothing to do with helping people or balancing a budget and everything to do with the "pull yourself by the bootstraps" pipe dream. Acknowledging that social issues (mental/physical illness, lack of education, chronic poverty) leads to drug issues and that adressing these problems first, instead of the symptoms such as squandering welfare money on crack, is critical to solving the problem, gets you called a commie. | ||
|
Billyray
Canada49 Posts
On June 11 2011 00:28 Baarn wrote: I disagree $42 is much cheaper than just handing out drug addicts checks that are at minimum 5 times that amount. Ones that claim children and it goes up exponentially. They way I see it though is that this is good for Florida. With a demand of 150,000+ recipients needing to get drug tested opens up employment opportunities for people that live there. You can take the Certified Professional Collections Trainer course for about $150. it's a 7 hour course. It opens opportunities to get a job making over 30k a year. I don't think this is a bad situation for anyone. With this reasoning, everyone should throw their garbage directly in the street: the government could then hire thousand of workers to keep the streets clean and it would create new jobs ! Win/win situation ! You can't just say that drug testing costs are only 42$ per person and in the same breath say that new jobs at 30k a year will have to be created to administer the same tests. You have to take every factor in the equation. And it's not as if they will be testing people once in a lifetime either. This program will implement regular and frequent testing, thus the cost/benefit ratio will radically shoot down once the hypothetical free riders are all denied welfare because then you'll only be testing the clean people. | ||
|
MekkaLekkaHigh
United States4 Posts
If our federal and state governments didn't waste our money, if they taxed all people evenly and fairly, then we would have plenty of money for social programs. A very large portion of our tax dollars are embezzled everyday by politicians and their corporate friends. I suggest everyone read this book, Confessions of an Economic Hitman. http://www.amazon.com/Confessions-Economic-Hit-John-Perkins/dp/1576753018 Skip the first couple of minutes. | ||
|
Baarn
United States2702 Posts
On June 11 2011 00:41 Billyray wrote: With this reasoning, everyone should throw their garbage directly in the street: the government could then hire thousand of workers to keep the streets clean and it would create new jobs ! Win/win situation ! You can't just say that drug testing costs are only 42$ per person and in the same breath say that new jobs at 30k a year will have to be created to administer the same tests. You have to take every factor in the equation. And it's not as if they will be testing people once in a lifetime either. This program will implement regular and frequent testing, thus the cost/benefit ratio will radically shoot down once the hypothetical free riders are all denied welfare because then you'll only be testing the clean people. Like I said above if I have to drug test for a job because I want to make money then welfare should have to test to make money also. Of course not this will hopefully be a long term thing for people interested in the medical field. No hopefully the clean ones will get jobs since they can pass a drug screen like anyone else. There are jobs that don't test also like restaurants maybe construction. So this entire thing is avoidable if they are embarrassed or on drugs. Can seek treatment also to get clean. Can't even begin to calculate the tax revenue these jobs will create. It all works out. | ||
|
stephls
United States241 Posts
On June 11 2011 00:17 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: I see a rise in Floridian alcoholism. Lol to that But I don't see a problem with this. They won't be sent to jail if they fail a drug test. If they want to use money from the government for food or housing, they should not be spending money on things that they don't need. It isn't even about giving money to druggies, but more so instilling a sense of responsibility and value to the money they are given. | ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
| ||
|
huameng
United States1133 Posts
On June 10 2011 18:10 Baarn wrote: ACLU is hilarious. Why do I have to take a drug test for a job but welfare applicants get to avoid it? Funny how the people that pay taxes so we have programs like this get no representation like this. Is it that incredibly hard to stay clean so you pass your test and then you can resume your addiction? Come the fuck on. They get to avoid it because it's unconstitutional! If you are upset that they haven't declared drug tests in the workplace unconstitutional, I would advise getting the ACLU to start building that case, instead of just ignoring this case and favoring drug tests for welfare recipients. | ||
|
Molkovien
Denmark59 Posts
And the few people who chose to stay on drugs will off course completely disappear and no longer be a burden to society. I am sure they will not turn to a life of crime. Pretty sure no scientific studies prove anything like that. And since we gonna overrule the 4th amendment with this, I think it opens the doors for us starting to do drug tests and alcohol tests at schools also. Imagine all that money we gonna make on fines from those silly kids. Kids will just have to grow the fuck up and be mature and responsible, just like i am sure every single one of us was. Why stop their though, lets do it to people on pensions also, that will teach them to be old and a burden to society. And just cause the Governor stands to gain huge amounts of money from this, does not mean it is not because he really cares. I am sure these poor people on welfare tested positive will receive payed for options for treatment. Since we determined they need help would be really fucking cruel not to offer help after all. Not very Christian at all. And since the governor is such a good Christian man, constantly talking about the bible guiding him. I am positive he will not just leave people to rot on the streets. | ||
|
Billyray
Canada49 Posts
On June 11 2011 01:08 Baarn wrote: Like I said above if I have to drug test for a job because I want to make money then welfare should have to test to make money also. Of course not this will hopefully be a long term thing for people interested in the medical field. No hopefully the clean ones will get jobs since they can pass a drug screen like anyone else. There are jobs that don't test also like restaurants maybe construction. So this entire thing is avoidable if they are embarrassed or on drugs. Can seek treatment also to get clean. Can't even begin to calculate the tax revenue these jobs will create. It all works out. What's your point ? That the people who are already jobless and smoking crack will get a job as a construction worker if they are scared of losing their benefits ? Your posts doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. 1) A huge proportion of welfare recipients do not consume drugs or if they do, they will just switch to alcohol or find ways to circumvent the tests, just like stoners have been doing for the better part of 30 years. 2) Testing these people is really stupid and wasteful. 3) The ones who get caught will have to resort to other means of income. The difference between you and I is that I know for sure that for the vast majority of the people comprised in this category, gainful employment won't be an option. And what if the people who get caught have kids ? Do their kids also need to suffer (more) crushing poverty because the middle class needs to feel good about teaching the shiftless bums a lesson about the worth of money ? 4) From a strict monetary perspective, this is doomed to fail. It would surprise me that the governement cuts enough people to upset the costs of mandatory, regular testing of the whole Florida population that is on welfare and we're not talking about the other costs (police, homeless shelters, etc.). This is just shifting the burden elsewhere. And as a final point, I live in Quebec, which is basicall a socialist heaven and even here, drug rehab programs are underfunded and understaffed. They can't follow the demand and with my experience with Florida, these services are most assuredly in a more abyssmal state over there. It would be nice if people were able to reconcile with the notion that the "welfare clientele" even if they are drug users are people nonetheless and that we should strive to help them get out of their misery instead of oppressing them even more with ridiculous measures such as this. | ||
|
-vVvTitan-
United States473 Posts
If someone truly wants to quit something in order to survive, they will. I just don't understand these arguments of-- OH MY God Think of the Children!!! That card has been played enough in these debates. | ||
|
Billyray
Canada49 Posts
On June 11 2011 02:12 Titan107 wrote: It's not the state's fault the parents resort to drugs. If they CHOOSE to go down that road, then it is THEIR fault their kids will not eat. Perhaps some responsibility will arise within the parent's life... Bodes well for these kids future ! Going hungry and possibly homeless because daddy is a drug addict. And yes, every drug user on welfare is a potential millionnaire that is too irresponsible to realize his true potential. And people universally choose to do drugs or not. They totally don't get addicted or use them to escape their already shitty reality. | ||
|
JamesJohansen
United States213 Posts
| ||
|
JamesJohansen
United States213 Posts
On June 10 2011 23:59 Klipsys wrote: If you haven't already (for whatever reason) please READ the article and THE THREAD before you post Few things to point out. 1) Drug test's aren't free, thus "saving tax payer money" is at best a misnomer, and more appropriately a lie (or marketing). Drug testing thousands of people is not going to save anyone money. It's probably cheaper to let them use drugs. 2) Not everyone on welfare does drugs. A large portion perhaps (unknowable), but never the less, many of these people receiving benefits have children who have committed no crime except to be born to the (apparently) wrong parents. 3) Drug testing parolee's and ex-cons doesn't stop them from using/beating the test, and neither will this 4) And to the quoted poster, I suggest you read 1984 before spouting such off ridiculous non-sense. Remember it's better to say nothing, and have others assume you a fool, than open your mouth and remove all doubt. While I agree with you, the legislation simply isn't fully justifiable otherwise there would be no discussion to the contrary. I can argue rather successfully that this would wind up costing the state more money, and possible screw people out of their benefits. Let's be frank I don't really care for most unemployed people, it's the mom with 6 kids who now has stand in line to piss in a cup twice a week to barely feed them. She shouldn't have had six fucking kids in the first place if she can't afford to pay for them. Reality is a bitch. Life is cruel, I'm sorry. | ||
|
Perseverance
Japan2800 Posts
| ||
|
BRaegO
United States243 Posts
| ||
|
Billyray
Canada49 Posts
On June 11 2011 02:28 JamesJohansen wrote: She shouldn't have had six fucking kids in the first place if she can't afford to pay for them. Reality is a bitch. Life is cruel, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, but if you are posting on an internet forum about a video game on a Friday afternoon, I don't think you have experienced the cruelty of going hungry because your ass is addicted to drugs and middle-class wankers needed to feel good by stripping you of the meager amount they pay out. Do I think it is right for many to use welfare as a way to subisdize their drug use ? No. Do I think that forcing them into even more poverty is the solution to the problem ? Hell no. | ||
|
Billyray
Canada49 Posts
On June 11 2011 02:29 BRaegO wrote: So what's wrong with it? If you are innocent then you won't mind giving a drug test for the help. I don't know why some people are mad about stopping people from abusing the system. I makes no sense for this not to be a required process(in every state) for receiving FREE MONEY. I don't know about anyone else, but if my taxes are going to go to people that need help anyways, why not have some of the money go to making sure the right people get the help. So they turn to alcohol, and smoking. There are ways to monitor that too. Again, if the taxes are going to go out no matter what, make it legit. Where does it say that the program is intended to help ? Welfare will just stop giving them money and the governement hope that they magically turn into productive citizens while they will probably turn to crime or working side jobs from time time, all the while evading taxes. | ||
| ||
