BIG QUESTION ????

"two chicks at the same time"

"Office Space" reference FTW.

Read the studies after this passed in Florida - The money they spent drug testing all applicants (because they had to reimburse those that passed) was far and beyond the money they denied to the less than 2% that failed the tests. The governor directly profited from this because the drug company contracted to do the tests was one he own stock in.

Next question - Why aren't alcoholics targets of receiving assistance then? Along your line of reasoning this abuse would not stand either but there is no test for that even though alcoholism is far more common.

I just realized that you have taken a good topic and made it miserable. Congrats for the derailment.

to the OP, my apologies for being sucked in by this. As my next act as the all knowing I will forbid trolls from derailing threads.

Make drug testing essential for people on government assistance

*punches ^ in face..... ridiculous and discriminatory policy. Since when is addiction not a treatable disease? Wouldn't that money be better spent investing in treatment programs to help those people instead of punishing them, making their problems worse, and worst of all hurting the children of those families who already struggle?

I would imprison ^^ for wanting to solve a disagreement with punching someone. and all people receiving assistance would be on a "treatment plan" and when you stray from your plan then you don't get paid that week. Also, if you're a drug addict then you wouldn't be allowed a license to have children (yes, you'd need a license to reproduce!)

what about recovering drug addicts?

That is the kicker; recovering addict means they are trying; drug tests for assistance and then a voucher stating "I'm recovering" from the agency that is helping them. Give them assistance as long as they stick with it. It isn't cut and dry, but I know my share of folks that collect assistance but don't bother to do more. Nothing like $300 dollars of foodstamps on pop, candy and instant meals. *shrugs* Ah well.

Read the studies after this passed in Florida - The money they spent drug testing all applicants (because they had to reimburse those that passed) was far and beyond the money they denied to the less than 2% that failed the tests. The governor directly profited from this because the drug company contracted to do the tests was one he own stock in.

Next question - Why aren't alcoholics targets of receiving assistance then? Along your line of reasoning this abuse would not stand either but there is no test for that even though alcoholism is far more common.

I agree, there is no test outside of a constant eye; thus it is something we have little ability to control. I'd take it this way. I, myself, have $20.00, thats it to spend. Two people, complete strangers come up to me. One looks slovenly, drunkard... the other looks like a normal mom with two kids. Assumptions can be made for both based on that. Some people would say, the drunk should get your help, he has an addicition. Others would say the mom with two kids. How do I determine who would most benefit from the money? If I had a drug test and the mom posted for Heroine, do the kids then outweigh the fact she is a drug addict? *shrugs* Grey area, there is a lot of it!

Make drug testing essential for people on government assistance

AMEN! And require food stamps be for healthy foods. I cringe when I see the cart loaded with garbage.

Both of these! And putting a limit on how many children you can have while on assistance... If you can't support 1 you shouldn't be allowed to have the second while on assistance.

Read the studies after this passed in Florida - The money they spent drug testing all applicants (because they had to reimburse those that passed) was far and beyond the money they denied to the less than 2% that failed the tests. The governor directly profited from this because the drug company contracted to do the tests was one he own stock in.

Next question - Why aren't alcoholics targets of receiving assistance then? Along your line of reasoning this abuse would not stand either but there is no test for that even though alcoholism is far more common.

I just realized that you have taken a good topic and made it miserable. Congrats for the derailment.

to the OP, my apologies for being sucked in by this. As my next act as the all knowing I will forbid trolls from derailing threads.

Well then my answer to the big question would be to stop discrimination and force everyone to have facts to back up their opinions.

if everyone just sat back, chilled out and had a smoke everyone wud get on and it would be a happy harmonious world. lol

agreed! lol :drinker:

Drug tests for CEO's of BoA? *laughs*

Financial institutions have done more damage to the US economy than social programs that assist the poor and elderly like food stamps or unemployment assistance. And the trillions of dollars that were given to the banks were used to bail out investors and upper management (most of whom are already super rich). There's your terrible socialism right there.

I'm not saying there's no waste or fraud in government programs that try to help the poor. I'm saying the waste and fraud in the financial industry is 1000 times worse. Literally. From corrupt student loan programs, from fraudulent municipal bond credit default schemes, from manipulated LIBOR rates that increased mortgage payments to you and me, etc., etc., the list goes on and on. But because people don't really understand it, and because these same financial institutions use their money to bribe public officials (er, finance their election campaigns), nothing is done.

If you want to drug test welfare recipients, go for it. It won't change anything. And no doubt the company that gets the contract will be linked to your governor. Probably his wife sits on their board, earning a fat check for doing nothing... And Goldman Sachs will issue bonds to finance the entire scheme.

--P

Drug tests for CEO's of BoA? *laughs*

Financial institutions have done more damage to the US economy than social programs that assist the poor and elderly like food stamps or unemployment assistance. And the trillions of dollars that were given to the banks were used to bail out investors and upper management (most of whom are already super rich). There's your terrible socialism right there.

I'm not saying there's no waste or fraud in government programs that try to help the poor. I'm saying the waste and fraud in the financial industry is 1000 times worse. Literally. From corrupt student loan programs, from fraudulent municipal bond credit default schemes, from manipulated LIBOR rates that increased mortgage payments to you and me, etc., etc., the list goes on and on. But because people don't really understand it, and because these same financial institutions use their money to bribe public officials (er, finance their election campaigns), nothing is done.

If you want to drug test welfare recipients, go for it. It won't change anything. And no doubt the company that gets the contract will be linked to your governor. Probably his wife sits on their board, earning a fat check for doing nothing... And Goldman Sachs will issue bonds to finance the entire scheme.

--P

^Applauds!

Ban smoking!!! Sorry tobacco industry. It's a nasty habit and I'm sick of breathing in everyone's second hand smoke!

Every child would be born to parents who love and nurture them, believe in them, give them a strong work ethic and a deep sense of compassion for others and send them off into the world with a irrepressible sense of humor.

I just described my childhood. Thanks Mom and Dad!

I would make it so that DA BEARS never lose to the PACKERS again and they make the playoffs every year. Oh and win a SB at least once every 5, got to let other teams win it.

Sex. Isn't that always the answer?

Bwahahahha! I think this was your answer to a post I wrote yesterday....although it was the correct answer then too! :drinker:

Make drug testing essential for people on government assistance

*punches ^ in face..... ridiculous and discriminatory policy. Since when is addiction not a treatable disease? Wouldn't that money be better spent investing in treatment programs to help those people instead of punishing them, making their problems worse, and worst of all hurting the children of those families who already struggle?

I would imprison ^^ for wanting to solve a disagreement with punching someone. and all people receiving assistance would be on a "treatment plan" and when you stray from your plan then you don't get paid that week. Also, if you're a drug addict then you wouldn't be allowed a license to have children (yes, you'd need a license to reproduce!)

what about recovering drug addicts?

That is the kicker; recovering addict means they are trying; drug tests for assistance and then a voucher stating "I'm recovering" from the agency that is helping them. Give them assistance as long as they stick with it. It isn't cut and dry, but I know my share of folks that collect assistance but don't bother to do more. Nothing like $300 dollars of foodstamps on pop, candy and instant meals. *shrugs* Ah well.

i know a lot of people who are in recovery, myself included, who have NEVER had any type of government assistance (aside from financial aid for college), work full time, pay taxes, support families, and spend money wisely.

I would wish that people would follow directions, use critical thinking, enhance their writing skills, and do well in school.

Reinstate public punishments by peers.