Your unemployment example is exactly correct, because it is directly related to the work. Someone could be a drug addict and hold a full time job, someone could be poor for a million other reasons and not be on drugs... once again, you assume and generalize by saying one goes with the other when it is not true. Please show proof of such if you are gonna say otherwise.
ummm... There is no difference, the gov is paying these people and providing them their basic living needs. Just as a job pays you... Recieving food stamps and needing of assistance has to do with money, if you don't have the money to buy yourself clothes/food/house then logically you certinly don't have the money to buy drugs. If they are finding alot of people on drugs it shows an abuse to the system. Is it discrimination to force people on unemployment to make them apply to at least 3 jobs a week and show proof???
So it's infringing on people's rights to have requirements before they've given taxpayer money from the government? I don't quite follow.....
Requirements which pertain the area absolutely makes sense. Low income housing has income requirement, unemployment has employment search requirements, food stamp programs have income and need requirements.. see where I'm going with this? It's all pertinent to the area of need and requirement. Drug use is illegal for all citizens and is not directly pertinent to food stamps or any other program in any manner.
So it's infringing on people's rights to have requirements before they've given taxpayer money from the government? I don't quite follow.....
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Requirements which pertain the area absolutely makes sense. Low income housing has income requirement, unemployment has employment search requirements, food stamp programs have income and need requirements.. see where I'm going with this? It's all pertinent to the area of need and requirement. Drug use is illegal for all citizens and is not directly pertinent to food stamps or any other program in any manner.
So it's infringing on people's rights to have requirements before they've given taxpayer money from the government? I don't quite follow.....
Sure it pertains, what if they are failing mulitple pre-employment drug tests? By the way how do Pre-employment drug screening pertain to you being landscape Manager??? Sounds dicriminatory to me, since its illegal for all citizens and is not directly pertinent to managing a landscape crew...
You're combining several things here at once. Firstly, simply because a specific employer requires testing or a specific number of requirements (background checks, drug testing, etc) does not mean it should be mandatory for all. Secondly, unless it's the law that every employer must check for test x, it remains up to the employer to decide specifications of hiring and testing requirements. That's employment law. Thirdly, you still have not shown any proof there's a direct correlation between the two issues. Lastly, what specifically is the aim of such policy? You haven't answered that directly.. is it to curb corruption in assistance programs? is it to curb drug use? Either way you cut it, this is a very poorly aimed idea to do both.
Sure it pertains, what if they are failing mulitple pre-employment drug tests? By the way how do Pre-employment drug screening pertain to you being landscape Manager??? Sounds dicriminatory to me, since its illegal for all citizens and is not directly pertinent to managing a landscape crew...
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
You're combining several things here at once. Firstly, simply because a specific employer requires testing or a specific number of requirements (background checks, drug testing, etc) does not mean it should be mandatory for all. Secondly, unless it's the law that every employer must check for text x, it remains up to the employer to decide specifications of hiring and testing requirements. That's employment law. Thirdly, you still have not shown any proof there's a direct correlation between the two issues. Lastly, what specifically is the aim of such policy? You haven't answered that directly.. is it to curb corruption in assistance programs? is it to curb drug use? Either way you cut it, this is a very poorly aimed idea to do both.
Sure it pertains, what if they are failing mulitple pre-employment drug tests? By the way how do Pre-employment drug screening pertain to you being landscape Manager??? Sounds dicriminatory to me, since its illegal for all citizens and is not directly pertinent to managing a landscape crew...
So why can't it remain up to the Gov. to decide the specs of hiring and testing requirements??? Its not a right to recieve tax payer money. There is continual abuse of the welfare system, its pretty ignorant to assume they are all poor people down on their luck. And there is a logical coorelation between them, 40% of Minorities(AA) are on welfare, they make up about 14% of the population in the US. Now take a look at the incarceration stats specific to drugs. At some point in time people need to quit acting like welfare abuse is not an issues. The aim of such policy would be to cut down on ther recreation spending, as they should be focusing on providing for their familys basic needs and use the program for what its there for. Welfare is not a lifestyle but its treated as such.
good on you for helping out the students in need, but you're not a country providing school supplies and clothes. you're a concerned teacher/couple, which is fantastic but that doesn't mean, “…we live in a country that has free education, which provides free books, and all school supplies, free clothes…”
no doubt there are parent's using this money to buy home theater systems, surround sound systems, and large flatscreen tv's, but this is not specific to drug addicts.
and i understand that you may have experience with some of the scenarios you've used, but you've still made sweeping over-generalizations that don't represent reality. your stories may describe one percent, ten percent, even twenty percent of assistance recipients but i don't believe that justifies the over-generalization.
it's all very, very sad.
Thats a vicious pattern my friend... the issue is that the parents do not provide these materials, if me or my wife didn't, these students would not have these supplies, the school can not send children home or punish them for this since its a public school. So what do they do. Nothing.... They just sit there and continue to graduate because your not allowed to fail them. My wife has about 4-5 6th graders who can't even read. How is she supposed to teach when there are kids in her class who can't even read at 6th grade... I help her grade assignments sometime and neither of us can even understand what the kids are writing, I have a 4 year old who can write better than the majority of these 6th graders. The parents never show up for Parent teacher conferences, its a never ending cycle... I think people who don't experience issue like this, really don't know who bad innercity's are and what their lifestyle is like.
Again, please provide some proof and fact and data backing up your statements.
Also, The government could decide all employers have to test for drugs or have back ground checks, etc.. but in most instances, they leave it up to the employer. But even with this said, the notion that you're aiming to fix corruption in assistance programs by mandating drug testing is very misguided. In fact, it'd probably venture to say more people corrupt the system who are smart enough to get around the laws and receive benefits compared to mis-spending funds on "recreation" as you allude too. Lastly, I find it rather odd that many in our society have no issue telling others how to live their lives because they assume it's somehow taking away from their own tax funds, etc. You make many generalizations which have no real proof other than your inkling or assumptions yet find this be enough to tell millions of people to have to go through testing because of a corrupt few. If we did this in any other area of life, people call that discrimination. Whether the smallest or largest notion, people in our nation want to play both sides of the fence... do we let government run rampant and dictate everything such as national ids, mandatory drug testing for all and every other invasive oversight to buck out corruption and poor action in society or do we use it aptly when it's necessary to the particular area as I have previously mentioned. Should we install mandatory blood alcohol breathalyzers in all cars because there's a portion of society which break the law? Most would say no and that's against your rights, but you and others seem to have no issue with declaring such policies when it is aimed at others and mostly on faulty bias or assumption.
So why can't it remain up to the Gov. to decide the specs of hiring and testing requirements??? Its not a right to recieve tax payer money. There is continual abuse of the welfare system, its pretty ignorant to assume they are all poor people down on their luck. And there is a logical coorelation between them, 40% of Minorities(AA) are on welfare, they make up about 14% of the population in the US. Now take a look at the incarceration stats specific to drugs. At some point in time people need to quit acting like welfare abuse is not an issues. The aim of such policy would be to cut down on ther recreation spending, as they should be focusing on providing for their familys basic needs and use the program for what its there for. Welfare is not a lifestyle but its treated as such.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Again, please provide some proof and fact and data backing up your statements.
Also, The government could decide all employers have to test for drugs or have back ground checks, etc.. but in most instances, they leave it up to the employer. But even with this said, the notion that you're aiming to fix corruption in assistance programs by mandating drug testing is very misguided. In fact, it'd probably venture to say more people corrupt the system who are smart enough to get around the laws and receive benefits compared to mis-spending funds on "recreation" as you allude too. Lastly, I find it rather odd that many in our society have no issue telling others how to live their lives because they assume it's somehow taking away from their own tax funds, etc. You make many generalizations which have no real proof other than your inkling or assumptions yet find this be enough to tell millions of people to have to go through testing because of a corrupt few. If we did this in any other area of life, people call that discrimination. Whether the smallest or largest notion, people in our nation want to play both sides of the fence... do we let government run rampant and dictate everything such as national ids, mandatory drug testing for all and every other invasive oversight to buck out corruption and poor action in society or do we use it aptly when it's necessary to the particular area as I have previously mentioned. Should we install mandatory blood alcohol breathalyzers in all cars because there's a portion of society which break the law? Most would say no and that's against your rights, but you and others seem to have no issue with declaring such policies when it is aimed at others and mostly on faulty bias or assumption.
So why can't it remain up to the Gov. to decide the specs of hiring and testing requirements??? Its not a right to recieve tax payer money. There is continual abuse of the welfare system, its pretty ignorant to assume they are all poor people down on their luck. And there is a logical coorelation between them, 40% of Minorities(AA) are on welfare, they make up about 14% of the population in the US. Now take a look at the incarceration stats specific to drugs. At some point in time people need to quit acting like welfare abuse is not an issues. The aim of such policy would be to cut down on ther recreation spending, as they should be focusing on providing for their familys basic needs and use the program for what its there for. Welfare is not a lifestyle but its treated as such.
You seem to have a hard time understanding that they are recieving Tax Payers Money to live...
The "bad apples" cause inconvenience for EVERYBODY in the world, no matter what their economic or social standing happens to be.
No they don't. I've never met anyone who's been inconvenienced by someone choosing to smoke weed, or take ecstacy, or LSD at the weekend. It's never bothered me or anyone I've ever known, ever.
Sorry, but I didn't make my point very clear. I was trying to convey that there are bad apples in every economic group, and they cause inconvenience to others.
There are wealthy, poor, educated, uneducated bad apples in the world.
I completely understand that but we're all still waiting for you to provide some fact to the generalizations you're making.
Also, I find it rather funny that you and many other who are so fiscally responsible for others go nutty bout issues like this, but don't seem to rant and rave about the other significant areas of tax payer dollars which are massively corrupt. Campaign finance, wars and military budgets, lobbying, poor tax laws, people (not poor) living outside of their income level (hint: housing bubble) and the dozens and dozens of areas. But I guess it's just all the minorities and immigrants stealing our tax funds? .. and if we'd fix this one area, the rest will just fall in place and be magically better? It's very, very flawed and misguided blame in a society full of gross misconduct and corruption. It's like handing out a parking meter ticket while ignoring to stop a gunman on a mass murder rampage right in front of you. How's that for a image?
You seem to have a hard time understanding that they are recieving Tax Payers Money to live...
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I completely understand that but we're all still waiting for you to provide some fact to the generalizations you're making.
Also, I find it rather funny that you and many other who are so fiscally responsible for others go nutty bout issues like this, but don't seem to rant and rave about the other significant areas of tax payer dollars which are massively corrupt. Campaign finance, wars and military budgets, lobbying, poor tax laws, people (not poor) living outside of their income level (hint: housing bubble) and the dozens and dozens of areas. But I guess it's just all the minorities and immigrants stealing our tax funds? .. and if we'd fix this one area, the rest will just fall in place and be magically better? It's very, very flawed and misguided blame in a society full of gross misconduct and corruption. It's like handing out a parking meter ticket while ignoring to stop a gunman on a mass murder rampage right in front of you. How's that for a image?
You seem to have a hard time understanding that they are recieving Tax Payers Money to live...
What generalizations have I made???
How would you know what I do and don't go nutty over concerning my taxes??? Thats a nice generalization right there... So your thought process is, since its all corrupt, let not fix anything???
You have generalized about the number of people on assistance and on drugs - the crux of your argument is very flawed because of this. Please provide some data backing up this fact. When you do that, I'll be more than happy to correct any of my comments if I am wrong, but until that, you are vastly generalizing on these topics.
And if your real concern is cleaning up corruption or drug use in society, the first place you would begin, would not be assistance programs, it would be something much, much larger where you could have access to a much greater percentage of the population, not a smaller aspect of it. The fact that you're fixated on such a small group, makes it very obvious your bias and over-generalizations are the reason for your belief, not the facts and certainly not to curb corruption or stop drug use in general.
What generalizations have I made???
How would you know what I do and don't go nutty over concerning my taxes??? Thats a nice generalization right there... So your thought process is, since its all corrupt, let not fix anything???
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
You have generalized about the number of people on assistance and on drugs - the crux of your argument is very flawed because of this. Please provide some data backing up this fact. When you do that, I'll be more than happy to correct any of my comments if I am wrong, but until that, you are vastly generalizing on these topics.
And if your real concern is cleaning up corruption or drug use in society, the first place you would begin, would not be assistance programs, it would be something much, much larger where you could have access to a much greater percentage of the population, not a smaller aspect of it. The fact that you're fixated on such a small group, makes it very obvious your bias and over-generalizations are the reason for your belief, not the facts and certainly not to curb corruption or stop drug use in general.
What generalizations have I made???
How would you know what I do and don't go nutty over concerning my taxes??? Thats a nice generalization right there... So your thought process is, since its all corrupt, let not fix anything???
THen please compare the military budget to welfare budget for me... Since you brought up military...
I don't have to compare anything - you're the one claiming such a mandatory testing be done. I merely pointed out there's plenty of of areas in tax payer funds that misuse and misappropriate funds. Even with that stated, please provide data making your point valid - when you do that, I'll be more than happy to retract my comments and say you're right.
THen please compare the military budget to welfare budget for me... Since you brought up military...
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I don't have to compare anything - you're the one claiming such a mandatory testing be done. I merely pointed out there's plenty of of areas in tax payer funds that misuse and misappropriate funds. Even with that stated, please provide data making your point valid - when you do that, I'll be more than happy to retract my comments and say you're right.
THen please compare the military budget to welfare budget for me... Since you brought up military...
Sorry man but your the one who brought up the military... I am not going to do your work for you, anyways, we all benefit from defense spending, no tax payer benefits from welfare spending.
Man it's funny how you're trying to turn the tables and conversation on me here huh. I used the military as an example.. you don't like it fine so be it. How bout we get back to topic? We're all still waiting for you to show us data proving or showing some that people on assistance are drug abusers enough to warrant some type of testing to get the assistance. If you can't prove this the rest of your comments about this topic are a moot point and generalization. Go ahead, prove us all wrong.. I'll be waiting.
Also, if this connection is as easily and widespread as you claim it to be, it should be rather easy to find some links or stories about this topic and prove yourself correct.
Sorry man but your the one who brought up the military... I am not going to do your work for you, anyways, we all benefit from defense spending, no tax payer benefits from welfare spending.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Everyone's keeping their cool in here while discussing this topic, right?
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
The total cost is a whopping
$ 338.3 BILLION DOLLARS
A YEAR AND IF YOU'RE LIKE ME,
HAVING TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING
THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY; IT IS
$338,300,000,000.00 WHICH
WOULD BE ENOUGH TO STIMULATE
THE ECONOMY FOR THE CITIZENS OF
THIS COUNTRY.
I took some numbers out because I did not want to quote it the whole thing
but they seem high 350 billion a year, not sure about that plus since we have no idea how many illegal citizens there are it is kinda hard to how much they cost the government...... they are estimates at best.
on a another note, if this legislation passed.... what would they do about alcohol, grandpa's cough syrup is probably the worst of all the drugs and very destructive to the family unit... and legal
what I was thinking was the money issue, if those numbers are correct even with in 20 to 25% give or take thats a butt load of money...per year !
Godfather.
might be a butt load as you call it but 25% of the number would be less than 100 billion a drop in the bucket
what some don't realize is that the cost of not providing all those services is greater what it is hard to understanding the savings in those terms
it is kinda like complaining about having to get regular oil changes but if you didn't the cost of having to replace your engine would be far greater
Comments
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Also, The government could decide all employers have to test for drugs or have back ground checks, etc.. but in most instances, they leave it up to the employer. But even with this said, the notion that you're aiming to fix corruption in assistance programs by mandating drug testing is very misguided. In fact, it'd probably venture to say more people corrupt the system who are smart enough to get around the laws and receive benefits compared to mis-spending funds on "recreation" as you allude too. Lastly, I find it rather odd that many in our society have no issue telling others how to live their lives because they assume it's somehow taking away from their own tax funds, etc. You make many generalizations which have no real proof other than your inkling or assumptions yet find this be enough to tell millions of people to have to go through testing because of a corrupt few. If we did this in any other area of life, people call that discrimination. Whether the smallest or largest notion, people in our nation want to play both sides of the fence... do we let government run rampant and dictate everything such as national ids, mandatory drug testing for all and every other invasive oversight to buck out corruption and poor action in society or do we use it aptly when it's necessary to the particular area as I have previously mentioned. Should we install mandatory blood alcohol breathalyzers in all cars because there's a portion of society which break the law? Most would say no and that's against your rights, but you and others seem to have no issue with declaring such policies when it is aimed at others and mostly on faulty bias or assumption.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Sorry, but I didn't make my point very clear. I was trying to convey that there are bad apples in every economic group, and they cause inconvenience to others.
There are wealthy, poor, educated, uneducated bad apples in the world.
Also, I find it rather funny that you and many other who are so fiscally responsible for others go nutty bout issues like this, but don't seem to rant and rave about the other significant areas of tax payer dollars which are massively corrupt. Campaign finance, wars and military budgets, lobbying, poor tax laws, people (not poor) living outside of their income level (hint: housing bubble) and the dozens and dozens of areas. But I guess it's just all the minorities and immigrants stealing our tax funds? .. and if we'd fix this one area, the rest will just fall in place and be magically better? It's very, very flawed and misguided blame in a society full of gross misconduct and corruption. It's like handing out a parking meter ticket while ignoring to stop a gunman on a mass murder rampage right in front of you. How's that for a image?
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
How would you know what I do and don't go nutty over concerning my taxes??? Thats a nice generalization right there... So your thought process is, since its all corrupt, let not fix anything???
And if your real concern is cleaning up corruption or drug use in society, the first place you would begin, would not be assistance programs, it would be something much, much larger where you could have access to a much greater percentage of the population, not a smaller aspect of it. The fact that you're fixated on such a small group, makes it very obvious your bias and over-generalizations are the reason for your belief, not the facts and certainly not to curb corruption or stop drug use in general.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Bullshit.
Also, if this connection is as easily and widespread as you claim it to be, it should be rather easy to find some links or stories about this topic and prove yourself correct.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
might be a butt load as you call it but 25% of the number would be less than 100 billion a drop in the bucket
what some don't realize is that the cost of not providing all those services is greater what it is hard to understanding the savings in those terms
it is kinda like complaining about having to get regular oil changes but if you didn't the cost of having to replace your engine would be far greater