Dude, you always miss the point on this subject... The gov. is paying for their lifestyle, raising/clothing/feeding them and their kids they are allowed to single them out and put restriction/regulations that they see fit. Just like how my employer (who is paying me) is allowed to set regulations/restrictions on what I do even if only a few people are guilty of it. If I don't like it then I can quit. If welfare recipients don't like it, then can go get a job.
Also its not taking away food money, if its implemented correctly there can be monitary consequences for failing the drug test. That money would go right back into the system. I would gladly pay more taxes to help social welfare programs if there was any sort of consequences and pro-active measures being take to quit the continual abuse of the system.
no i am not missing the point. i get the point loud and clear. people on your side of the argument can not stand the thought of parting with their precious money, so they have to scapegoat the least of our society. how many excuses have you posted on this board over the last few months to justify your position that you are greater than other people simply because you have a job and they do not? and like you said in the other thread, thank god your house is going on the market, because we can't have your property value going down because some people are going to live in government subsidized housing now can we?
selfish selfish selfish.
why are you deflecting from answering my questions?
oh yeah, and again i will ask, get a job where???? as if it is that easy in these times..
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
oh yeah, and again i will ask, get a job where???? as if it is that easy in these times..
I thought about this point, too, and I'm not sure what's going on with you and blockhead, but I'm just responding to the point in the thread, so not meaning to interrupt... :?
It isn't easy to get a job in these times, no doubt. But if a person really wants to work, they can find a job doing something. I have nothing against using some of my tax dollars to help the less fortunate who really need the help, but not those who are getting high and abusing the system. Presently, I have a job in which I make $650/month. It took 3 months for me to get that job. I 'make too much money' to be eligible for government assistance of any kind unless I am pregnant (which would stop when I have said baby). I still pay taxes for my little job, I do not do drugs (not a prude, just been there, done that, and it didn't get me anywhere), and I know people who receive welfare who DO do drugs, and who have more money than I do at any given time. I don't have a comprehensive solution, but I know it doesn't seem fair.
oh--I should have clarified, I have never received any sort of benefits--my situation is circumstantial, and the only reason I looked into it was to try to get health insurance and/or dental--haha. They basically laughed me out of ss.
Dude, you always miss the point on this subject... The gov. is paying for their lifestyle, raising/clothing/feeding them and their kids they are allowed to single them out and put restriction/regulations that they see fit. Just like how my employer (who is paying me) is allowed to set regulations/restrictions on what I do even if only a few people are guilty of it. If I don't like it then I can quit. If welfare recipients don't like it, then can go get a job.
Also its not taking away food money, if its implemented correctly there can be monitary consequences for failing the drug test. That money would go right back into the system. I would gladly pay more taxes to help social welfare programs if there was any sort of consequences and pro-active measures being take to quit the continual abuse of the system.
I agree with you on many of the things you say about welfare, but this statement underlined^^^ is just absurd. It reflects a lot about how you are misled by stereotype and generalizations. Yes, there are some people who abuse the system, but they arent 'raising' everyones kids. in fact there are a lot of people on govt assistance that have jobs but need 'some' help.
I am back and forth on whether or not to drug test applicants. I can see good coming from it, but really wish there werent underlying politics and slimy deals.
Dude, you always miss the point on this subject... The gov. is paying for their lifestyle, raising/clothing/feeding them and their kids they are allowed to single them out and put restriction/regulations that they see fit. Just like how my employer (who is paying me) is allowed to set regulations/restrictions on what I do even if only a few people are guilty of it. If I don't like it then I can quit. If welfare recipients don't like it, then can go get a job.
Also its not taking away food money, if its implemented correctly there can be monitary consequences for failing the drug test. That money would go right back into the system. I would gladly pay more taxes to help social welfare programs if there was any sort of consequences and pro-active measures being take to quit the continual abuse of the system.
I agree with you on many of the things you say about welfare, but this statement underlined^^^ is just absurd. It reflects a lot about how you are misled by stereotype and generalizations. Yes, there are some people who abuse the system, but they arent 'raising' everyones kids. in fact there are a lot of people on govt assistance that have jobs but need 'some' help.
in this I thought he was referring to drug testing. And where I'm at you only get 'some' help if you make less that $400/month in the household.
LMFO !!!!! there are a lot of people trading their food cards and using their welfare money for drugs
and you can't compare them to our military men and women.
but anyway this shit is just too funny, if you are clean then a piss test shouldn't be an issue and if you want to get high then find a way to earn your drug money.
Godfather.
you are missing the point. the point is they are trying to single out an entire population based on the actions of a few people. and the government is going to foot the bill for the testing. either that, or they are going to make the recipient pay for the testing with money that they do not have. it is taking food money out of their pockets. why not just pay for their food? it is a budget neutral move. all it is is taking food money away, granting the government more power, and spending tax dollars on testing instead of helping people eat.
I know what you are saying but as I said if a person is clean then it's not an issue, the wide spread of drug use and welfare fraud is out of sight and it is a shame that some people will be screwed because of the ones that do their dirt on the tax payers dime, I will also agree that this could be a government move to trim the welfare budget. but I gt to tell ya man I have personally known and partied with many people that abuse the welfare system and had no intentions of working...and there are more than a few of those out there and the cost goes into the millions pulse every year and probably more than most realize so really I have no problem with a piss test, it's a small price to pay for temporary funding to support your family or your self.
One of the more popular services at Solantic, the urgent care chain co-founded by Florida Gov. Rick Scott, is drug testing, according to Solantic CEO Karen Bowling.
Given Solantic's role in that marketplace, critics are again asking whether Scott's policy initiatives - this time, requiring drug testing of state employees and welfare recipients - are designed to benefit Scott's bottom line.
The Palm Beach Post reported in an exclusive story two weeks ago that while Scott divested his interest in Solantic in January, the controlling shares went to a trust in his wife's name.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
One of the more popular services at Solantic, the urgent care chain co-founded by Florida Gov. Rick Scott, is drug testing, according to Solantic CEO Karen Bowling.
Given Solantic's role in that marketplace, critics are again asking whether Scott's policy initiatives - this time, requiring drug testing of state employees and welfare recipients - are designed to benefit Scott's bottom line.
The Palm Beach Post reported in an exclusive story two weeks ago that while Scott divested his interest in Solantic in January, the controlling shares went to a trust in his wife's name.
Slimy.
I usually don't judge by physical appearance, but Rick Scott simply looks like he's up to no good.
So let me get this straight....
A welfare recipient who had a FREE pull off a bong at a party a month ago can be denied funding....but the welfare recipient who pops 18 oxxy's a day and drinks their face off all night can get funding. makes perfect sense!
oh right....a welfare recipient shouldn't be at a party, they should be getting one of those easy to find jobs.
Some of you people just don't think things thru....like....at all.
Welfare are being paid for nothing... They are not contributing anything back into the system in which they take from...
This blatantly false statement that you repeat ad nauseum regardless of any actual facts is the reason I'm not going to discuss this with you, Blockhead.
LMFO !!!!! there are a lot of people trading their food cards and using their welfare money for drugs
and you can't compare them to our military men and women.
but anyway this shit is just too funny, if you are clean then a piss test shouldn't be an issue and if you want to get high then find a way to earn your drug money.
Godfather.
you are missing the point. the point is they are trying to single out an entire population based on the actions of a few people. and the government is going to foot the bill for the testing. either that, or they are going to make the recipient pay for the testing with money that they do not have. it is taking food money out of their pockets. why not just pay for their food? it is a budget neutral move. all it is is taking food money away, granting the government more power, and spending tax dollars on testing instead of helping people eat.
Plus, children shouldn't be made to suffer because of the "sins" of their parents.
LMFO !!!!! there are a lot of people trading their food cards and using their welfare money for drugs
and you can't compare them to our military men and women.
but anyway this shit is just too funny, if you are clean then a piss test shouldn't be an issue and if you want to get high then find a way to earn your drug money.
Godfather.[/quote]
you are missing the point. the point is they are trying to single out an entire population based on the actions of a few people. and the government is going to foot the bill for the testing. either that, or they are going to make the recipient pay for the testing with money that they do not have. it is taking food money out of their pockets. why not just pay for their food? it is a budget neutral move. all it is is taking food money away, granting the government more power, and spending tax dollars on testing instead of helping people eat.[/quote]
I know what you are saying but as I said if a person is clean then it's not an issue, the wide spread of drug use and welfare fraud is out of sight and it is a shame that some people will be screwed because of the ones that do their dirt on the tax payers dime, I will also agree that this could be a government move to trim the welfare budget. but I gt to tell ya man I have personally known and partied with many people that abuse the welfare system and had no intentions of working...and there are more than a few of those out there and the cost goes into the millions pulse every year and probably more than most realize so really I have no problem with a piss test, it's a small price to pay for temporary funding to support your family or your self.
LMFO !!!!! there are a lot of people trading their food cards and using their welfare money for drugs
and you can't compare them to our military men and women.
but anyway this shit is just too funny, if you are clean then a piss test shouldn't be an issue and if you want to get high then find a way to earn your drug money.
you are missing the point. the point is they are trying to single out an entire population based on the actions of a few people. and the government is going to foot the bill for the testing. either that, or they are going to make the recipient pay for the testing with money that they do not have. it is taking food money out of their pockets. why not just pay for their food? it is a budget neutral move. all it is is taking food money away, granting the government more power, and spending tax dollars on testing instead of helping people eat.[/quote]
I know what you are saying but as I said if a person is clean then it's not an issue, the wide spread of drug use and welfare fraud is out of sight and it is a shame that some people will be screwed because of the ones that do their dirt on the tax payers dime, I will also agree that this could be a government move to trim the welfare budget. but I gt to tell ya man I have personally known and partied with many people that abuse the welfare system and had no intentions of working...and there are more than a few of those out there and the cost goes into the millions pulse every year and probably more than most realize so really I have no problem with a piss test, it's a small price to pay for temporary funding to support your family or your self.
Plus, children shouldn't be made to suffer because of the "sins" of their parents.
They shouldn't, but they do. And this isn't just regarding the topic at hand.
Yes, they do. They have extra-hard lives already. I just don't think we should actively promote their suffering by denying them food for which they would otherwise qualify.
Do you or do you not also support drug testing for farmers who receive subsidies from the government?
Considering they're getting 'free money' from the government, I wouldn't think you'd want them spending it on drugs.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
Okay, let's say I'm a drug-addicted welfare recipient...
...but I turn tricks for my drugs, so I'm not spending any of my welfare money on them. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I get a job as a stripper to pay for my drugs. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I only use drugs when I can get them for free. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I keep trying to quit but I can't afford rehab. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but they legalize the drugs that are currently illegal. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I'm addicted only to legal drugs. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I'm addicted to costly cigarettes. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I spend the money on junk food instead of healthy food. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
if you have the means to earn money then why would you be on welfare in the first place ? if your a drug addict with kids and you are hooking or dealing then nobody is dening your kids but you.
if you have the means to earn money then why would you be on welfare in the first place ? if your a drug addict with kids and you are hooking or dealing then nobody is dening your kids but you.
Godfather.
As has been pointed out time & time again on this forum, many, MANY people have jobs but still require government assistance to make ends meet. They are called the working poor and our country is creating more and more of them.
As for your second point... well, I'm not even sure what it is. If we (as a society) take away needed government assistance from a child, we are taking away needed government assistance from a child - regardless of what the parents are or aren't doing. Imagine if you were a hungry child and your parent did something "wrong" and YOU were punished by having your food taken away. Would you think that was fair? Or necessary? Or helpful?
Also, does it matter to you whether or not the activity (hooking, selling drugs, etc) is legal or illegal? So, like, hookers in Texas are the only ones denying their kids, but hookers in Nevada's kids are being denied by the government?
LMFO !!!!! there are a lot of people trading their food cards and using their welfare money for drugs
and you can't compare them to our military men and women.
but anyway this shit is just too funny, if you are clean then a piss test shouldn't be an issue and if you want to get high then find a way to earn your drug money.
Godfather.
Fan of bigger government, huh?
lol
I'm all for a smaller government. My favorite type of small, unobtrusive government is the type that wiretaps its citizens, tells people who they can and cannot marry, insists pregnant women give birth even if they don't want to, wants to dictate where certain religions can and cannot be practiced, takes away a person's right to band together with peers to lobby for better working conditions...
And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
I'm all for a smaller government. My favorite type of small, unobtrusive government is the type that wiretaps its citizens, tells people who they can and cannot marry, insists pregnant women give birth even if they don't want to, wants to dictate where certain religions can and cannot be practiced, takes away a person's right to band together with peers to lobby for better working conditions...
LMFO !!!!! there are a lot of people trading their food cards and using their welfare money for drugs
and you can't compare them to our military men and women.
but anyway this shit is just too funny, if you are clean then a piss test shouldn't be an issue and if you want to get high then find a way to earn your drug money.
I support the drug testing with stipulations. He is testing Government employees. He is not doing this to help anyone,
he is going to rake in the big bucks. Another crook voted in! Floridians! I live here but I do not vote for KNOWN crooks! In my town they voted in the ex mayor to city council at the same time he was under indictment. Caught red handed! :?
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
Only if everyone who receives ANY public money has to be tested. State employees, kids in public schools. Politicians etc.
???? whats your reasoning for that??? They are PAYING back into the system (tax) welfare recipients are not, they are given money not working for it.
Why is it the gov. job to drug test kids??? That is what we have PARENTS for, thats their job. Its not the gov. job to be PARENTS.
1. Relax
2. Not everyone on Public assistance is always on it. Therefore they pay into it as well. They also pay into it in the form of car tags and sales tax.
The military doesn't really drug test that often. I did 3 active and 3 reserve in the Corps and aside from initial entry I only remember being tested twice in 6 years.
Comments
selfish selfish selfish.
why are you deflecting from answering my questions?
oh yeah, and again i will ask, get a job where???? as if it is that easy in these times..
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
It isn't easy to get a job in these times, no doubt. But if a person really wants to work, they can find a job doing something. I have nothing against using some of my tax dollars to help the less fortunate who really need the help, but not those who are getting high and abusing the system. Presently, I have a job in which I make $650/month. It took 3 months for me to get that job. I 'make too much money' to be eligible for government assistance of any kind unless I am pregnant (which would stop when I have said baby). I still pay taxes for my little job, I do not do drugs (not a prude, just been there, done that, and it didn't get me anywhere), and I know people who receive welfare who DO do drugs, and who have more money than I do at any given time. I don't have a comprehensive solution, but I know it doesn't seem fair.
oh--I should have clarified, I have never received any sort of benefits--my situation is circumstantial, and the only reason I looked into it was to try to get health insurance and/or dental--haha. They basically laughed me out of ss.
I agree with you on many of the things you say about welfare, but this statement underlined^^^ is just absurd. It reflects a lot about how you are misled by stereotype and generalizations. Yes, there are some people who abuse the system, but they arent 'raising' everyones kids. in fact there are a lot of people on govt assistance that have jobs but need 'some' help.
I am back and forth on whether or not to drug test applicants. I can see good coming from it, but really wish there werent underlying politics and slimy deals.
in this I thought he was referring to drug testing. And where I'm at you only get 'some' help if you make less that $400/month in the household.
I know what you are saying but as I said if a person is clean then it's not an issue, the wide spread of drug use and welfare fraud is out of sight and it is a shame that some people will be screwed because of the ones that do their dirt on the tax payers dime, I will also agree that this could be a government move to trim the welfare budget. but I gt to tell ya man I have personally known and partied with many people that abuse the welfare system and had no intentions of working...and there are more than a few of those out there and the cost goes into the millions pulse every year and probably more than most realize so really I have no problem with a piss test, it's a small price to pay for temporary funding to support your family or your self.
Godfather.
Given Solantic's role in that marketplace, critics are again asking whether Scott's policy initiatives - this time, requiring drug testing of state employees and welfare recipients - are designed to benefit Scott's bottom line.
The Palm Beach Post reported in an exclusive story two weeks ago that while Scott divested his interest in Solantic in January, the controlling shares went to a trust in his wife's name.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Slimy.
I usually don't judge by physical appearance, but Rick Scott simply looks like he's up to no good.
A voice of reason....
So let me get this straight....
A welfare recipient who had a FREE pull off a bong at a party a month ago can be denied funding....but the welfare recipient who pops 18 oxxy's a day and drinks their face off all night can get funding. makes perfect sense!
oh right....a welfare recipient shouldn't be at a party, they should be getting one of those easy to find jobs.
Some of you people just don't think things thru....like....at all.
This blatantly false statement that you repeat ad nauseum regardless of any actual facts is the reason I'm not going to discuss this with you, Blockhead.
Plus, children shouldn't be made to suffer because of the "sins" of their parents.
Fan of bigger government, huh?
you are missing the point. the point is they are trying to single out an entire population based on the actions of a few people. and the government is going to foot the bill for the testing. either that, or they are going to make the recipient pay for the testing with money that they do not have. it is taking food money out of their pockets. why not just pay for their food? it is a budget neutral move. all it is is taking food money away, granting the government more power, and spending tax dollars on testing instead of helping people eat.[/quote]
I know what you are saying but as I said if a person is clean then it's not an issue, the wide spread of drug use and welfare fraud is out of sight and it is a shame that some people will be screwed because of the ones that do their dirt on the tax payers dime, I will also agree that this could be a government move to trim the welfare budget. but I gt to tell ya man I have personally known and partied with many people that abuse the welfare system and had no intentions of working...and there are more than a few of those out there and the cost goes into the millions pulse every year and probably more than most realize so really I have no problem with a piss test, it's a small price to pay for temporary funding to support your family or your self.
Godfather.[/quote]
How much does welfare fraud total?
well you know what they say when you ASSume.
Godfather.
I know what you are saying but as I said if a person is clean then it's not an issue, the wide spread of drug use and welfare fraud is out of sight and it is a shame that some people will be screwed because of the ones that do their dirt on the tax payers dime, I will also agree that this could be a government move to trim the welfare budget. but I gt to tell ya man I have personally known and partied with many people that abuse the welfare system and had no intentions of working...and there are more than a few of those out there and the cost goes into the millions pulse every year and probably more than most realize so really I have no problem with a piss test, it's a small price to pay for temporary funding to support your family or your self.
Godfather.[/quote]
How much does welfare fraud total?[/quote]
check these out for a little info.
Godfather.
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jul/01 ... e-welfare1
http://fraud.laws.com/welfare-fraud/wel ... the-system
Yes, they do. They have extra-hard lives already. I just don't think we should actively promote their suffering by denying them food for which they would otherwise qualify.
...but I turn tricks for my drugs, so I'm not spending any of my welfare money on them. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I get a job as a stripper to pay for my drugs. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I only use drugs when I can get them for free. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I keep trying to quit but I can't afford rehab. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but they legalize the drugs that are currently illegal. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I'm addicted only to legal drugs. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I'm addicted to costly cigarettes. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
...but I spend the money on junk food instead of healthy food. Should I and my children be denied welfare?
Do you or do you not also support drug testing for farmers who receive subsidies from the government?
Considering they're getting 'free money' from the government, I wouldn't think you'd want them spending it on drugs.
if you have the means to earn money then why would you be on welfare in the first place ? if your a drug addict with kids and you are hooking or dealing then nobody is dening your kids but you.
Godfather.
As has been pointed out time & time again on this forum, many, MANY people have jobs but still require government assistance to make ends meet. They are called the working poor and our country is creating more and more of them.
As for your second point... well, I'm not even sure what it is. If we (as a society) take away needed government assistance from a child, we are taking away needed government assistance from a child - regardless of what the parents are or aren't doing. Imagine if you were a hungry child and your parent did something "wrong" and YOU were punished by having your food taken away. Would you think that was fair? Or necessary? Or helpful?
Also, does it matter to you whether or not the activity (hooking, selling drugs, etc) is legal or illegal? So, like, hookers in Texas are the only ones denying their kids, but hookers in Nevada's kids are being denied by the government?
lol
I'm all for a smaller government. My favorite type of small, unobtrusive government is the type that wiretaps its citizens, tells people who they can and cannot marry, insists pregnant women give birth even if they don't want to, wants to dictate where certain religions can and cannot be practiced, takes away a person's right to band together with peers to lobby for better working conditions...
Whoops, wrong guy, sorry.
he is going to rake in the big bucks. Another crook voted in! Floridians! I live here but I do not vote for KNOWN crooks! In my town they voted in the ex mayor to city council at the same time he was under indictment. Caught red handed! :?
This is what it's all about:
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/400601/ron-littlepage/2011-03-31/scotts-agenda-has-conflicts-interest
1. Relax
2. Not everyone on Public assistance is always on it. Therefore they pay into it as well. They also pay into it in the form of car tags and sales tax.