are requiring drug tests for welfare recipients.
Saw it on facebook don’t know if it’s true.
can’t find it on google…
but as a topic…
Any thoughts?
On the onset I’m for it.
Late,
grmpysmrf
Yes, it is being proposed. Not sure if it passed yet.
For it.
I also think on-going investigations should be made to ensure that those who really don’t need it don’t get it.
the only really reservations I may have about it, is obviously false + and False - what would the ramifications of those a False + kicked off forever?
Also, it seems like, economically, it would be a wash. the money they “save” is really going to the Urinalysis companies.
and historically speaking Companies don’t like to part with their cash so it’s not like that $$ would be put back in the community like it would be if it were going to the welfare frauds…
Late,
grmpysmrf
the only really reservations I may have about it, is obviously false + and False - what would the ramifications of those a False + kicked off forever?
Also, it seems like, economically, it would be a wash. the money they “save” is really going to the Urinalysis companies.
and historically speaking Companies don’t like to part with their cash so it’s not like that $$ would be put back in the community like it would be if it were going to the welfare frauds…
Late,
grmpysmrf
Right. Is it a one-shot deal or can the person re-test later to receive the hand-out?
I’m not sure exactly how much testing costs, but it can’t be that much when compared to years of hand-outs.
I’m not sure exactly how much testing costs, but it can’t be that much when compared to years of hand-outs.
Good point.
Late,
grmpysmrf
![http://stoppopculture.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/white-trash-2.jpg[/image]](http://stoppopculture.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/white-trash-2.jpg%5B/image%5D){kind=link}
HAHAGHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHA!!!
^ Peligro and his first wife
j/k
Late,
grmpysmrf
I don’t mind helping people and I’m not against welfare, per se.
I am against funding sloths and junkie losers, though. So, yeah, I’m all for it. If you’re gonna take public assistance I think you should meet some minimal requirements . . . and not being a junkie should be one of them.
And even if someone wanted to argue for people’s right to be a “recreational user” or something, I’m still going to say I’m for the testing . . . If someone is ready to accept handouts than s/he shouldn’t be throwing money away on something so frivolous.
You wanna get high? Do it with your money, not mine.
And even if someone wanted to argue for people’s right to be a “recreational user” or something, I’m still going to say I’m for the testing . . . If someone is ready to accept handouts than s/he shouldn’t be throwing money away on something so frivolous.
You wanna get high? Do it with your money, not mine.
Word!! if you’re on public assistance then you don’t have the extra cash to be a “recreational user”… cigarettes and alcohol should be off the table too!!!
Late,
grmpysmrf
I am for it, but then again I’m for mandatory sterilization.
So where do I stand, really?
I am for it, but then again I’m for mandatory sterilization.
So where do I stand, really?
I’d vote for ya.
depends on which drugs. if you’re going to test for cannabis, then tobacco and alcohol should also be tested for.
i would be for it, but only for the “harder” drugs (cocaine, heroin, MDMA, meth etc).
depends on which drugs. if you’re going to test for cannabis, then tobacco and alcohol should also be tested for.
i would be for it, but only for the “harder” drugs (cocaine, heroin, MDMA, meth etc).
Yeah but, unless s/he has a license for it for medical purpose (sorry, I’m applying CA rules here as I don’t know what they are in other states) then Cannibis is not only recreational . . . . it’s illegal.
But I’m cool with your suggestion. Smokes cost darn near 10 bucks a pack now. If some goon is having trouble making ends meet but still manages to spend $300 a month on lung cancer s/he must not care that much about food.
either way, if anyone ever passed this, it would be necessary to accommodate the influx of homeless/poor drug addicts. help them, educate them, help them find a job. might cost a lot of money at the beginning, but it would pay off in the long run.
either way, if anyone ever passed this, it would be necessary to accommodate the influx of homeless/poor drug addicts. help them, educate them, help them find a job. might cost a lot of money at the beginning, but it would pay off in the long run.
they already have a place for those people it’s called jail. Vagrancy is a crime!! and I’m sure the private prison sector will have a hand in pushing these urinalysis requirements.
Late,
grmpysmrf
[reply]either way, if anyone ever passed this, it would be necessary to accommodate the influx of homeless/poor drug addicts. help them, educate them, help them find a job. might cost a lot of money at the beginning, but it would pay off in the long run.
they already have a place for those people it’s called jail. Vagrancy is a crime!! and I’m sure the private prison sector will have a hand in pushing these urinalysis requirements.
Late,
grmpysmrf[/reply]
it amazes me you guys have private prisons…how is that even possible!? someone went full retard.
[reply][reply]either way, if anyone ever passed this, it would be necessary to accommodate the influx of homeless/poor drug addicts. help them, educate them, help them find a job. might cost a lot of money at the beginning, but it would pay off in the long run.
they already have a place for those people it’s called jail. Vagrancy is a crime!! and I’m sure the private prison sector will have a hand in pushing these urinalysis requirements.
Late,
grmpysmrf[/reply]
it amazes me you guys have private prisons…how is that even possible!? someone went full retard.[/reply]
Haven’t you heard? The private sector is the key to full on paradise…
Late,
grmpysmrf
21st century style Jim Crow laws from 3 of the most backward states in the Union.
Here’s a better idea. Let’s test farmers who take subsidies for drugs and alcohol abuse. Then let’s test each and every employee of every Wall Street firm who took Federal bailout money.
Why go after small potatoes?
Wemp for the win.
Slippery slope, y’all.
But yes, it is really embarrassing living in Missouri sometimes. It’s a pretty state, though.
Wemp for the win.
And of course, even if you’re found with only a trace amount of pot in your system…you’ll be convicted…and your voting rights will be taken away. And we all know that minorities on the dole all vote Democratic. In the meantime, a million fat, emphysema ridden, alcoholic crackers that collect welfare will still be on the voting roles. IOW…core Republican voters.