No more welfare for druggers

Discussion in 'Politics' started by B_starinvestor, Apr 2, 2009.

  1. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    Legislation is on the table in several states. Hopefully this can gain momentum and become federal.

    States Considering Drug Tests For Welfare Recipients

    People collecting public assistance and snorting it up their noses. That's ridiculous. If you have made the decision to collect tax dollars from working people, you should have enough responsibility to shelf your expensive drug habit.

    I've been a longtime proponent of this measure.
     
  2. D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,539
    Likes Received:
    1
    Starman, you are really desperate and jonsing for any "controversial" material to gin up conversation around here.

    I guess this is what you gotta do when conservative economic philosophy is burning up in flames (you switch topics).
     
  3. B_Nick8

    B_Nick8 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    11,912
    Likes Received:
    44
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York City, by way of Marblehead, Boston and Ge
    What Will said. But I suppose we could discuss it.
     
  4. Simon9

    Simon9 Active Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    98
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Princeton (NJ, US)
    When the govt gives people or organizations public money, it is natural that they then impose conditions. The bigger question of course, is SHOULD the govt be giving individuals and organizations public money whether as individual welfare or corporate welfare. Or foreign welfare.

    It's a lot of money.
     
  5. pym

    pym New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,400
    Likes Received:
    0
    How does this jive with your 'Giving up' 300 dollars of what is obviously Subsidy monies of some sort to a Hooker? We Know you don't work Fester. You do not Fool anyone here.
     
  6. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    Well, this is a political message board.

    Good grief. I surely don't agree that cons. economic theory is burning up in flames, as you put it. But that's not what this thread is about.

    this is about enacting legislation that can potentially do a number of positive things:

    1. Free up public assistance dollars that can be redirected to deserving individuals and families that put the welfare and importance of their families ahead of their drug dealer

    2. Provide useful incentive for druggers to clean up/sober up, which will improve their chances of becoming self-sufficient and more responsible.

    3. Send a message to future generations of druggers that they will not be nurtured by our government

    4. Send a message to druggers that if drugs are indeed the most important thing in their lives, they can get a job and pay for the drugs with their own money - not everybody else's.

    5. Given the plight of our economy and the massive pressure on gov't funds; this demonstrates that dollars are being carefully reviewed for effectiveness and can be justified.
     
  7. nudeyorker

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    42,918
    Likes Received:
    37
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NYC/Honolulu
    Well I already got trampled in another forum on the same topic. I have to agree with SI. I have to take a random drug test so that I can work and pay taxes, I don't think it is at all unreasonable to ask someone who is getting government assistance to say no to drugs if I'm helping to subsidize it.
     
  8. Principessa

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Messages:
    19,494
    Likes Received:
    28
    Gender:
    Female
    WHOA! Ease up on the haterade. I don't like his political views either; but Starinvestor has brought up a legitimate and politically relevant topic. Granted it's one I covered 3 weeks ago. :rolleyes: However, it seems to have gone from just being a Florida thing to something many states are considering. Thereby making it worthy of being brought to the table for discussion again. :cool:


     
  9. tripod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,249
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    460
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Statesville N.C.
    Cocaine goes out of your system in a matter of a few days, so the drug testing will be catching VERY few coke heads. Who those laws will catch are marijuana users. It is just a way of disenfranchising the millions of Americans who smoke weed and a pathetic way of saving money.
     
  10. sparky11point5

    sparky11point5 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston
    Star, why do you want the government involved in our personal lives? Or, do you feel that this should only apply to welfare recipients?

    I would suggest that if we want mandatory drug testing, we expand it to include bankers, defense contractors, and guys in their mom's basement using the tax-subsidized Internet. Anyone benefiting from the US government, in any way, should be subject to regular, comprehensive drug tests, including prescription narcotics, steroids, HGH, and anything that is harmful or a waste of our tax dollars. Gingrich and O'Reilly discussed this the other day, and advocated for Singapore-style drug testing, execution of drug dealers, and Federally-funded and operated rehabilitation centers. (I wonder what the showers could be used for?)

    Actually, when i give a pan-handler a 10 spot, I accept that they might drink it or inject it. It's this thing I have about personal choices, even bad ones.

    Vive la revolution!

    Sparky
     
  11. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest

    Yes; I get a sizeable piece of my father's massive monthly pension payment from being a retired teacher.

    You are the guy that shows up at Little League baseball games and heckles the umpires, aren't you? Unshaven, flask-in-hand bellering and screaming about every ball/strike call, wreaking of booze and ass.

    I've seen your type. Its a sad sight.
     
  12. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    The gov't is already involved in the personal lives of those on public assistance. That is, they are sending them taxpayer money from which they should be purchasing food, staples, etc for their families. Those tax dollars are not earmarked for drugs.

    Many of these professions are already subjected to random drug tests.

    If his mom is paying the internet bill he/she is not draining taxpayer funds.

    I doubt that many recipients of public assistance are bulking up on HGH and steroids. The rest of the above stmt is just silly. If a banker were snorting coke and was sitting on a public bench, he is not draining public funds. I hope he can work out his drug affliction; but its not costing hardworking Americans any money. His purchase of whatever he wants to put in his body - with his own funds - is not a taxpayer-funded expense to anyone else.


    Cheers to that. But that's your money. Not mine.
     
  13. TurkeyWithaSunburn

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    3,543
    Albums:
    5
    Likes Received:
    252
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    All parents who send kids to that socialist welfare institution called public schooling should be tested too. :rolleyes:
     
  14. pym

    pym New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,400
    Likes Received:
    0
    Uh......No again Fester. But the Lion's Club Organization that i belong to DOES sponsor a team.
    Spongin' off the old man at 36 eh? I knew it!
    So it's yer DAD's Basement! {i thought sure it would be yer ma.....ya know....the pity factor and all......}
    At least you haven't foisted off the Horror that is your life on your poor Ma.
     
  15. SR_Blarney_Frank

    SR_Blarney_Frank New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    2
    Funny but nowhere in the article is there any example or evidence of anyone on public assistance having snorted it up their nose.

    Of course that's the presumption being made by those proposing mandatory drug testing.

    As an aside, does it make a conservative's head spin to wail about government meddling in private industry and then advocate for arbitrarily drug testing Americans?

    A public bench... funded by taxpayers. In a public park frequented by impressionable schoolkids. Blowing his bonus paid for by bailout money. At a job he has because of the federal loans he used to get through business school. Et cetera.
     
    #15 SR_Blarney_Frank, Apr 2, 2009
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2009
  16. SR_Blarney_Frank

    SR_Blarney_Frank New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    2
    two key distinctions:

    1) There is a big difference between a private employer imposing a drug test on all employees and the government selectively requiring drug testing for receipt of certain, but not all, benefits or subsidies. Government is intended to be equitable and fair to all citizens. Private institutions can discriminate against anyone not belonging to a protected class.

    2) We all consume tax benefits so it's pointless to argue that welfare recipients are worthy targets simply because they receive benefits. The police don't randomly search cars cruising interstate highways nor does the fire department randomly check to make sure you're not cooking up crystal meth in the kitchen.

    There was a time when conservatives advocated for individual privacy and freedom from government intrusion in private affairs. That day is long gone.
     
  17. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow

    Someone check the thermostat in hell...I'm actually in complete agreement with 'festor on this one.

    I agree with this idea for the same reason that I think taypayer bailouts of private industry is a horrible idea. I can't stomach the thought of public money being used to subsidize fruitless or destructive behaviors. In all fairness, these bailout programs are ostensibly loans...but I'm not holding my breath waiting for those dollars to make their way back to the treasury.
     
  18. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    These legislators are not advocating the arbitrary testing of Americans. They are advocating testing of those Americans that collect taxpayer dollars; those that do not contribute taxes; but rather only reap the rewards of those that work and send money to the Treasury.

    Those that collect public assistance and do nothing for it - at least have an obligation to expend those resources on their families and living obligations, and those in the workforce are not obligated to support someone else's drug addiction.

    And the guy sitting on the bench is a taxpayer. In a sense, it's his bench too. You are referring to the student loans he paid back? And the bailout money that will be paid back?

    Public assistance [transfer payments] are never paid back. Its a drain on the treasury. The loans are paid back with interest.
     
  19. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    Well, why stop with drug testing? Since welfare recipients are just a drain on the economy, why don't we simply round up all welfare recipients and put them in public work camps? In addition to what ever public works projects they might be assigned to, they could be forced to construct their own housing, raise their own meat and grow their own fruit and vegetables all within the confines of the high, electric charged fences of the work camps.

    After all, similar legislative action enacted in the 1800's through the early 1900's has proved so effective with separating the native tribes within the borders of the USA and keeping them on reservations.

    Oh, and for those extra troublesome welfare queens and their drug addicted children, we could create "final solution booths" where one by one the booth would reduce them to jellied protoplasm which could then be purified of any drug residue and processed into Dorito-sized triangles which we could then feed back to the incarcerated to augment their diets.

    But before we do, does anyone have remotely reliable stats on how many US citizens on public assistance/welfare are using drugs? Maybe Plush Rush or Dr. Laura can tell us.
     
  20. D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,539
    Likes Received:
    1
    Please! All this snorting coke talk is getting me sexually aroused.

    Talk of snorting coke... and the smell of cheap $40 hotel rooms with ugly drapes...

    I'm trying to stay clear & focussed here.
     
    #20 D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse, Apr 2, 2009
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2009
Draft saved Draft deleted