drug testing people on welfare rant.....

[AZhitman]

You're not talking about building more infrastructure, stimulating the economy, creating jobs, are you?

I already said you win, damnit.

My bad, I honestly wasn't trying to belabor the point.

I left mid-post and finished after you had posted. Sorry homey!

[AppleBonker]

It's all good, man. I can usually run the devil's advocate bit indefinitely. People make it too easy to counter. In fact, I like playing that role because often times it makes me think long and hard about view-points that may actually be opposed to my own.

[Oatmealman]

I couldn't agree more greg.My opinion on this subject is that the welfare needs to kick the people who do drugs/use the money for things other than food/children/etc off and support the people who actually need welfare for a year period max and they should be weened off as well.Find a job,sure it's hard but if you try hard you can find one.To many people don't contribure to this society anymore and are putting a burden on the people who do.I'm tired of picking up other people's slack because their to lazy to wake up at 630 in the morning and go do a 8 hour shift.

[AppleBonker]

For all of you folks that are claiming the people on welfare should just find a job: have you tried being in that position? It's easy for me to say "just get a job" too, seeing as I currently have one. I'm not about to try to quit my job and then find another one working somewhere, so I don't know how easy it would be. I'm glad you all are fortunate enough to have jobs, and to have never made mistakes that make it difficult for you to be hired. I definitely expect those without jobs to keep looking for one, but I'm not sure where all of you are getting the idea that it's just super easy to pick up work right now.

[crazspence]

For all of you folks that are claiming the people on welfare should just find a job: have you tried being in that position? It's easy for me to say "just get a job" too, seeing as I currently have one. I'm not about to try to quit my job and then find another one working somewhere, so I don't know how easy it would be. I'm glad you all are fortunate enough to have jobs, and to have never made mistakes that make it difficult for you to be hired. I definitely expect those without jobs to keep looking for one, but I'm not sure where all of you are getting the idea that it's just super easy to pick up work right now.

then what are your views on the 2nd part of what i pointed out. those who tried looking for a job, no1 was hiring at the time, so they go on welfare. then they realize they could stay on welfare because its easier to not have a job?

[AppleBonker]

My view on it, they exist. Beyond that, I don't have a view. Do you know what percentage of recipients that is? I'll give you an internet hug if you do, cause that'll help get them off the teat.

[AZhitman]

There's gotta be a lot. 99 weeks apparently wasn't enough for a lot of people.

I was laid off from a 7 year gig in 2003. With the job market then being a little sucky, I freaked - Unemployment was more work than it was worth, so I went straight to a car dealer: "Teach me the ropes". It was the most humiliating, degrading, stressful job ever... I HATED it. But I had a wife and kids counting on me.

The whole time I was there, I was working my a$$ off, getting resumes out, interviewing, and most importantly, laying the groundwork to be my own boss someday.

I think what we see MORE often is this (follow me):

Guy hates his job, but he's making $280 a week. He gets laid off. His unemployment is $200 a week. He starts collecting his UI check, catches up on some TV, does some projects around the house, sleeping in, playing with the kids... He's saving a little more money - he doesn't have to drive to work, he's not buying lunch, he's not paying for uniform cleaning, tools, beers with the crew, union dues, whatever... Hey, look - $200 a week goes damn near as far as $280!

He puts in applications because he HAS to. Grumble grumble dammit. Now, the state he lives in has a rule - you don't have to accept a position making LESS than your last job (stupidest rule EVER, I know). But we're in a recession, right? NO ONE'S paying what he made before. He gets an offer of $240 a week - turns it down. $260? Eh, no thanks.

WAIT. Now he's actually doing a side job here and there, under the table, for cash. He's making $100 a week, tax free, on top of his $200 unemployment check.

Guess what we've just created? A statistic. Is he a bad guy? I dunno. Staying home every day IS a pretty sweet deal. And if you get paid MORE to do it....

BTW - That guy? On his 99th week of UI, he's ecstatic to learn that the current Administration is extending his benefits... AGAIN.

[Urabus GodofTraction]

I'm just glad the OP has drifted away. I think you should have to take a piss test to access the internet!

[Dattebayo]

I wrote a whole post with tons of references, replies to Greg and his comments and everything, but the internet deleted it.

Since I don't care to re hash everything that I just took an hour to write, forget it. Thanks, but I am not a "boob" and you know it. Later.

[cellardoorv]

I kinda read some of the posts, but I think I agree mostly with Gerry.

I realize that the welfare system was put into place for a reason, and yes, there are people on it with a true need of it. But I don't know why we allow people who fell of their horse somehow to GET to the point of being on Welfare to control money?

Sure, some of it is uncontrollable. You lost your job because it went overseas, you have some sort of disability, etc. But what about those people who don't have any money because they squandered everything, made bad decisions, fell into something like drugs, etc... WHY do THEY get to deliberate where the money goes? I think Welfare should be already "spoken for" as to where the money goes. For example, with WIC checks, you can ONLY buy food, or certain food products. No, you can't buy cigarettes, no, you can't go get your nails did, no, you can't buy your 8 ball of coke. Just milk, cereal, eggs, bread, etc. So why can't they have a portion of money JUST for food? JUST for rent? JUST for utilities, etc? You know, the necessities? Why do they get cut a generic check for $XXX.XX to go spend it as they please?

It INFURIATES me when I see the Welfare system at work at my place of employment. Hold on a second here, you're telling me that you're on Welfare, which pays for all your medical, including all prescriptions. But when your oxycodone prescription is too soon through your state insurance to fill, but you're willing to pay cash to get to prescription, you suddenly have enough money to pay for a 300 dollar cash prescription? And then you stuff your prescription in your Juicy Couture purse with your long a** fake, manicured nails, with jewelry dangling around your wrists, and drive away in your Navigator. Trailing you is Additional Money Bonus #1, #2, #3 and #4, otherwise known as your children, all of which have a different last name than your own. What the hell is going on here?

I don't know if drug testing is the answer, but something needs to change. Maybe the answer involves mandatory birth control in there somewhere...

[AZhitman]

Sounds like you agree with me as well.

I'd support case management (just like Probation) for anyone receiving government services. Since you can't navigate this world on your own, you'll get someone to help you. They'll make sure you're not buying drugs, they'll ensure your kids are being fed, and they'll remind you that you can't buy a knockoff Gucci purse with your welfare check, nor can you use it to bail your babydaddy out of jail.

Let the butthurting commence.

p.s. Welcome back, Gorgeous. The forums just got a whole lot more sunshiney.

[cellardoorv]

I thought people were assigned some sort of case worker or social worker, or what have you. Every time one of them gets pissed about not being able to get something for free, they mention calling their case worker. Why can't they hold the purse strings?

And it's good to be back.

[Jesda]

There's nothing "slippery" about it. If you had the first clue as to how much welfare actually takes out of YOUR paycheck, you'd feel differently.

If you can afford drugs, you don't need MY money, so get your stoned, worthless a$$ of welfare.

Your personal freedoms END when I'm paying your bills.

Need I remind the "freedom and privacy" crowd that drug use is illegal. You want decriminalization? Good. Me too. Yes, I support decriminalization. BUT until then, it's still illegal. And even when it IS decriminalized, I'll STILL call for drug testing of welfare recipients, student loan recipients, disability recipients and food stamp applicants. Don't like it? Get your hands outta my pockets, then.

I agree with the above. Saved me a lot of typing.

[Jesda]

And it's good to be back.

I like your avatar.

[cellardoorv]

I like you. I can make brownies. Wanna come over and watch The Sandlot?

[Jesda]

ITS A TRAP

Joke's on you. No one will pay the ransom and you'll still have to feed me.

[AZhitman]

God forbid.

Jesda would be 400-lbs within a month.

[IBCoupe]

2) We're never gonna agree on that, as we have a fundamentally different agreement as to the role / function of government. I'm ok with people starving, you're ok with digging in my pocket to prevent it.

Greg, again, you're arguing a different point. I don't care whether you think welfare shouldn't exist - it does exist, and its purpose is not to regulate society. It's to keep people living. If you think it has a different intent, say so.

So far, you haven't.

[SullivanRacing06]

2) We're never gonna agree on that, as we have a fundamentally different agreement as to the role / function of government. I'm ok with people starving, you're ok with digging in my pocket to prevent it.

Greg, again, you're arguing a different point. I don't care whether you think welfare shouldn't exist - it does exist, and its purpose is not to regulate society. It's to keep people living. If you think it has a different intent, say so.

So far, you haven't.

which bring me back to my previous statement

if your getting a check from the government every month you should be obligated to take a drug test to receive it..

why is this to much to ask? if you pass you get your free money, if not then your banned from any government help. pretty simple concept.. this would not regulate society, this will separate the ones who test positive out of the welfare system and the once who clean

[IBCoupe]

But, again, that's not the goal of the welfare system.

Parallels keep being drawn to probation systems, but our intent behind probation, as a part of the criminal justice system, is entirely different from our intent behind welfare.

With welfare, people look to society for help. With probation, society looks to people to behave a certain way.

[SullivanRacing06]

and if your having the government hand you a check every month why would it be to much to ask to take a piss test in order to get your free money?

dont spend tax payers money on drugs, this would be a easy way to get some of the people off welfare

[RobPaulson]

With welfare, people look to society for help. With probation, society looks to people to behave a certain way.

Example:

Say you have kids.

You send one to college, you pay the tuition and give him an allowance for food and books, and he is responsible for fun money.

He calls you a month into his semester, crying because he is hungry. You ask, 'what happened to the food money I gave you?' . . . he hesitantly states that he spent it on drugs and alcohol.

how would this make you feel?

Right now, if we say for this example that the welfare system is the parent, the response would be 'oh thats ok, here is some more money for food'.

me? I'd beat the s*** out of my kid and make him attend a community college, on his dime, until he cleaned up.

[IBCoupe]

That's not what welfare's for. As angry as it would make you feel to see money wasted (in the American government? No way...), that's no excuse to redefine the system.

You want to limit who is eligible for welfare? Fine.
You want to take children away from parents who can't afford to care for their kids? Okay.
You want to provide career counseling along with welfare? Good!
You want to provide drug and alcohol counseling along with welfare? Even better!
Parenting tips? That's pretty damned consistent with what welfare's for.

Welfare was instituted as a plan to allow poor (often single) women the opportunity to stay at home and be full-time mothers. Then came Reagan and the scare of the "welfare queen" and another case of American amnesia. We instituted requirements, counter to the central purpose of welfare, that they leave their children and go find work. Now we blame "bad parenting" for the demise of mostly urban youth.

Your solution to people having problems is to make their problems worse, on the theory that what probably got them into the mess somehow won't keep them from getting out of it. Either that or you, like Greg, are indifferent on human suffering. I should admit that I'm that way, too... though I'd plead ignorance before I plead indifference. There's a possibility that I'm somewhere near Asperger's on the Autism spectrum.

[crazspence]

i believe welfare was meant to be a TEMPORARY solution to peoples problems. who in the right f*** mind had the idea of "oh youre poor so lets take the governments money and pay you until you die". no matter how you think about it, it doesnt make any economic sense.

[AppleBonker]

Well, what do you guys think about taking it further? We should probably monitor them more closely to make sure the money isn't going towards cigarettes. Or other forms of entertainment. I think GPS tracking devices on the parents (and probably the children too) would help. As well as a whole bunch of video and audio surveillance. Why stop at just drugs? Some of the people on welfare are wasting the money in plenty of other ways.

[cellardoorv]

Which is why if there was somehow a way for the government to be like "Oh, okay, you live at BrightOaks apartment complex? Here. Lemme pay the rent DIRECTLY to them for you. Oh, your car payment is at Liberty Honda? I'm sending a check to them with their name on it. Your electric bill is $134.98? Here you go, Light and Power company, check for you. Need food? Here's a check that will only be accepted for food items at your local grocer."

I think that will greatly reduce the money being spent elsewhere, like on drugs, gamb|ing, non-necessities, etc, because the money is specific as to what it is for.

I don't think people on Welfare should have the financial freedom to spend the money where they deem "necessary". Most of them landed in Welfare because they make poor decisions regarding money in the first place.

[RobPaulson]

I don't think people on Welfare should have the financial freedom to spend the money where they deem "necessary". Most of them landed in Welfare because they make poor decisions regarding money in the first place.

well said fred.

[cellardoorv]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39YUXIKrOFk[/youtube]


Oh... WELL said Fred...


Nonetheless. Enjoy.

[SullivanRacing06]

temporary yes, sorry but in gainesville where i live you hear people on welfare b**** about how they cant buy smokes and beer with them, they dont give a f*** about their children, they spend all of their stamps on shrimp and steaks, sorry but if a simple drug test would take the people that do dumb s*** like this and not spend money on their children (that are sitting in the cart with no diapers and dirty clothes) people who pull crap like that are the ones id love to see fail the drug test, all the while they smell like the weed they just got done smoking in their car...... if your in between jobs and need a month or two of welfare/food stamps ect ect i understand you need the help to hold you over, but spending all you have on shrimp and steaks..... im sure there are a million things people have seen go wrong with the system but anytime you drive thru the section 8 living areas here in gainesville you'll see everyone standing out side in their new goochi (sp) clothes and their kids are running bare a** naked in the street...... pisses me the f*** off!!!!!!!!!!

[cellardoorv]

Punctuation. It's a beautiful thing.

What you're failing to realize is that while yes, some of the people who receive government aid DO take drugs, not all of them do. I don't think a simple drug test will eradicate all those who are failing at life. It's not just about weed anymore. It's prescription drugs, etc, which most people DO have a valid reason for taking, they just abuse it. So what do they do? Supply their prescription at the failed drug test, and go about living their lives and receiving their money.

The entire Welfare/State Assistance program needs to be re-worked in general. More restrictions, more monitoring/supervision as to how the money is supplied and to whom. Give it to apartment/utilities/food companies instead of the individual. A simple quick-fix patch like drug testing will not solve all the issues.