Florida to drug test for welfare - Page 31

On October 25 2011 10:12 Destro wrote:



what about using welfare as a means of survival to get off drugs..?

On October 25 2011 10:33 Kingsp4de20 wrote:


If they cant pay for the drugs how are they going to do them...want to eat don't do drugs. I would rather "the rather small part of my income" go towards someone who isn't and addict or criminal and legitimatly fell on hard times and needs a hand up....

On October 25 2011 10:46 Timerly wrote:


Except the rather small part will be bigger if you introduce a law like that. You'd also just be moving the benefit over to those who have much less of a problem, at least in comparison to addicts. The proposed test also can't provide a good view on possible alcoholism, how do you want to test that? It's much harder to prove, so now alcoholics are better people than crack addicts although they spend the same amount of money on their drug? It's really far from fair, hits the ones at the bottom and doesn't allow for any real option. Remember, addicts spend their money first and foremost on their fix. They will take care of their addiction, then buy food, THEN buy extra drugs from any extra money in relly bad cases. It will be harder to afford food. It will force crime. There have been numerous advances in that direction in many countries, in most it's found to be problematic from consitutional or human rights point of views in addition to the horrible cost effectiveness. The US have had a war on drugs for ages, yet their drug problems are so much bigger than in e. g. the Netherlands (where weed is legal!). You don't fix a national drug problem by prosecuting or banning or withholding money. You fix it by providing basic social standing to those close to the lower end of the society. You could imo make an argument for people having to do the test IF there was free therapy offered to drug addicts. However, you can't force the success of a measure by making it the only option when it really isn't (as money gets there somehow, some way, even if it's a couple coins stolen from your local church).

On October 25 2011 10:55 WTFZerg wrote:


So we continue to support people who dug themselves a hole so deep they can no longer see the sun and then cemented over it? Ridiculous.

Personal accountability must come into account at some point. At some time you have to say enough is enough and stop allowing trash to continue to live the way they do.

On October 25 2011 11:30 Xarow wrote:
Honestly, we wouldn't even have this problem if welfare was done away with as a whole.

I completely understand that some people use it temporarily as a 'crutch' of some sort but the amount of abusers, or even the idea of having any abusers at all is enough to not use it. Especially when America is in the debt situation that it's in right now.

On October 25 2011 11:37 Roe wrote:

doesn't social security have something like a trillion dollar surplus? or am i thinking of something else?

On June 10 2011 04:27 Kamuy wrote:
I'm sorry, whats wrong with this? You stick your hand out asking me for money, I want some assurance its not going to be injected into your arm or smoked. Beggar's can't be choosers.

On October 25 2011 14:23 darkscream wrote:
So if I'm on welfare in florida, and I spend $0 on drugs, but have friends who smoke me up at a party, I lose welfare even though I never spent any money on drugs.

This is a case where you're trying punish people in a wrong and stupid way and it won't work. Also, cutting welfare doesn't help anyone, states pay a lot more money for dumb bullshit like freebies for the politicians and inside deals. When are we going to cut those out?

On June 10 2011 04:25 SpoR wrote:
I mean it makes sense but yea the government testing for drugs without probable cause is kind of strange. Guilty before proven innocent kind of thing.

On October 25 2011 16:05 SynthFae wrote:
My only question is why just drugs? What about alcohol? What about candies? Is someone spending all their welfare money on sweets somewhat better? Money wasted is money wasted. Rather than doing all kinds of fancy tests, do a simple screening process in case of doubt. Now, with law like that everyone applying for welfare will have to be tested, tests costs as well and if the percentage of people they will actually filter out will be relatively small it will be actually bigger waste of money in the end.

All in all the system of welfare all around the world is flawed, but most politicians just look for solutions that will look nicely on their press conference rather than for ones that will actually solve problems. I doubt it will be change much, or bring any real savings.