drug testing people on welfare rant.....

[AppleBonker]

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.

Agreed. I think that plan would work far better than drug testing. Michele spittin' truth ^.

And OP, for the love of everything holy, your does not mean the same thing as you're. Same with their, they're and there. You're making my head hurt. And I'm assuming you hang out with these people on welfare in your area a lot? Otherwise I'm concerned about how you know their spending habits.

[SullivanRacing06]

applebonker- no i cook at my house almost every night, i spend allot of time in the lines at the local publix behind people who b**** about the same thing ever time (not being able to buy beer, blunts, cigarettes with food stamps), they will complain and yell at the cashier and then turn around and try to get me to agree with them and i tell them sorry i work my a** off for my money and i usually get a pssssshhhhhh white boy response...

sorry about making your head hurt, im running in and out of the garage all day to respond to posts

i work on allot of cars in section 8 housing, they always have cash and their cars will always need something.

[cellardoorv]

I think it's too easy to NOT work in this country now. Ryan and I will look at the section 8 housing around here and just be like... "WTF... really? THAT'S section 8? These brand new, beautiful three story townhouses with balconies and patios are SECTION 8!?"

People get allowances for everything. That's why they drive the Navigators, the Escalades, the Denalis. Sure, they lease them and aren't allowed to own them, but we're over here busting our asses to afford our Altimas, 240s, etc. They get to sit at home ALL day, do what they do, and get EVERYTHING paid for, and here Joe Schmo is, working 40 hours, just trying to make ends meet.

Something needs to change where the working should not be jealous of the non-working.

[Encryptshun]

Maybe someone has already said it, but simply put, there are people who at the current time rely on public assistance in order to keep paying the bills and put food on the table but who cannot wait to get off of it. There are others for whom it is a lifestyle and for whom living off the government is based on laziness, a form of anti-establishment protest and/or an act of continuing civil disobedience. It's always going to be that way, no matter how much legislation you throw at the problem.

Ultimately, we need to fix the system to support the former and reject the latter -- not by direct action against the citizens but by eliminating the root cause of the issues.

Until that happens, we really have only two choices: continue to promote the general welfare by providing for those who for whatever reason can not, (which, in some cases, decreases the immediate economic burden by preventing homes from getting foreclosed, cars repossessed, etc.) or discontinue the practice altogether and let an additional 2 million people potentially starve in the streets. There is a segment of our populace who, for the most part, does not care one whit about how we are perceived by the rest of the world, but I do, and I shudder to think what the current trend of "sink or swim" anti-entitlement backlash will look like to the rest of the global community unless cooler heads prevail. And before I get a lot of "We're the United States, so who gives a rat's *ss what the rest of the world thinks" let me say that you are free to believe what you wish, but please don't ever travel abroad with that attitude because I am not a xenophobic d*ckhead and do not want your bigoted myopia to mean I get bad service when I pay my hard-earned money to go to France.

[crazspence]

its because america hasnt see real poverty yet. wait till that happens. everyone is gonna s*** their pants because hardly anyone in america knows the true meaning of working for your keep. personally, i have no problem with people going hungry and dying. some of you might call me out and say im a f*** up inidividual. but i say to them, you guys havent been to a 3rd world country where people have learned to survive on little to nothing. f*** your welfare, cause ive been through worst.

[AppleBonker]

So your answer is to turn the US into a third world country? I'm pretty sure I like that idea even less than any option presented in this debate so far.

[crazspence]

i never said turn this into a 3rd world country. i was merely suggesting that people shouldnt take what they have for granted and actually do something productive. if youre given welfare, good, now make use of your self. i just hate people who take welfare for granted and believe that it is their natural born right to receive money from the government.

[Encryptshun]

Like I said above, a certain segment of the population is always going to use public assistance as a crutch (at least until we find out why and fix it). An argument can certainly be made that aid to the population is absolutely not the role of the federal government, but instead should be the role of private and religous organizations (or state governments). I doubt I could really argue that point, either, in terms of conceptual validity. But money is an easy issue to debate, whereas solving the root problem that creates the issue of an segment of the population that consumes much but produces little to nothing is far more difficult and requires empathy and altruism. Sadly those latter two qualities are sorely lacking in our society today.

[AZhitman]

Let 'em starve.

People are a lot more resourceful than the liberal hand-wringers would have you believe. They'll FIND a way when all other avenues are exhausted. It's NOT the government's responsibility to step in.

I've said this before: I think it's hilarious that the Darwinists in society are the first ones to step in and try to intervene when natural selection tries to run its course.

You want to fund welfare? Then fund it yourself. Get the F outta my paycheck.

I'm a lot more generous when I don't have some self-entitled elected a$$ rooting in my pocket without asking permission.

[krimsonviper]

Why not just NOT give them money, and instead give them vouchers for food, clothing and gas? Why not enact a system that will find them a job, and if they deny the job, or they are fired, pull their welfare? That would stop the unlawful spending of money and give them a choice to either pick themselves up, or stay on the ground and die.

*Edited for clarity*

[IBCoupe]

So I don't know if this has been asked yet:

What is the intent behind the proposed drug testing? What is it that we hope to accomplish?

[RobPaulson]

What is the intent behind the proposed drug testing? What is it that we hope to accomplish?

hand out less free money to people who do not deserve it.

[IBCoupe]

And drug use alone makes one less deserving?

[_b.jaye_]

And drug use alone makes one less deserving?

of a welfare check? not alone, but on average, i'd say its a pretty good indicator.

a welfare recipient whose using drugs probably contributes less to society and looks for a decent job with less determination than someone not using drugs. always? of course not, but are there enough exceptions to say its not a decent way to weed them out? i mean, your gonna find people getting wrongfully shafted with just about any way you screen the candidates. either use most appropriate net you got, or dont catch any of them.

i dont really have any info to back that up, other than knowing people on both sides, but id still bet its not too far off.

[RobPaulson]

And drug use alone makes one less deserving?

yes.

[IBCoupe]

Why? For the reasons assumed by B.Jaye? Or for some other reason?

What's the logical construction that gets us from drug use to "not deserving a welfare check?"

[SullivanRacing06]

if they are on welfare, why r they getting high and not looking for a job.

if they can go buy drug, go home, smoke, inject snort what ever why are they not capable of working for their own money?

[SullivanRacing06]

And drug use alone makes one less deserving?

yes.

yessss sir

[IBCoupe]

if they are on welfare, why r they getting high and not looking for a job.

The two are mutually exclusive?

[AZhitman]

Guys, you're falling face-first into the IBC logic trap.

The correct response is, "Why is ANYONE deserving of something they haven't earned?"

The follow up to that is, "What's your justification to opposing accountability of recipients of publicly-funded benefits?"

Taking money from my pocket to give to others without consulting me as to how that money is disseminated.... Hmmm. Taxation without representation comes to mind.

[crazspence]

Guys, you're falling face-first into the IBC logic trap.

The correct response is, "Why is ANYONE deserving of something they haven't earned?"

The follow up to that is, "What's your justification to opposing accountability of recipients of publicly-funded benefits?"

Taking money from my pocket to give to others without consulting me as to how that money is disseminated.... Hmmm. Taxation without representation comes to mind.

quoted for the mother f*** truth.

[Encryptshun]

I'm going out on a limb and guess Greg's "Darwinist" comment was directed at me. Touche, Greg. That is a great point. I agree that people are very resourceful when they have to be.

But you didn't address the distinction I was trying to make between temporary assistance and instutional welfare. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Also, we don't live in the natural world where you can just go kill a deer or grab fruit off a tree. These desparate people will turn to crime to survive and then will cost us more in legal expenses and incarceration costs than keeping them off the streets would.

[krimsonviper]

Why not just NOT give them money, and instead give them vouchers for food, clothing and gas? Why not enact a system that will find them a job, and if they deny the job, or they are fired, pull their welfare? That would stop the unlawful spending of money and give them a choice to either pick themselves up, or stay on the ground and die.

*Edited for clarity*

Maybe I was ignored? I dunno if it was a bad suggestions because I don't know anyone on welfare and I've never been on it, not looked into it so I havent a clue what it exactly entitles.

And to add to that quote, to pay their essential bills, they send a photo copy to the gov't of their bill and the gov't sends a check to welfare dependent that is made out to their biller. To stop the collection calls or to stop their power/water/heat/etc from being cutoff, when they apply for welfare, they should receive a statement to send to their biller stating they're on welfare.

This system will easily take care of how they're using their money and it will be next to impossible to use it on drugs/video games/gamb|ing/hookers/etc and given jobs and when the abuse is discovered repurcussions are delivered.

[IBCoupe]

Greg, you're still arguing a different topic. There's no trap. You're arguing that, in order to avoid justifying the withholding of welfare for certain reasons, we should justifying the withholding of welfare altogether.

I'm trying to get an answer to the nuanced question that is the subject of this thread, and you're trying to start a new thread. You're effectively ignoring the premise and the basis of this discussion: assuming we're to have welfare, should we restrict it to those who aren't caught using drugs?

[AppleBonker]

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater

I believe the phrase you were looking for is actually "don't throw the bathwater out with the baby".

[wingFeather]

I'm for drug testing of handout recipients & will vote in favor of such laws when possible.

[_b.jaye_]

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater

I believe the phrase you were looking for is actually "don't throw the bathwater out with the baby".

i dont think your supposed to throw out the baby. maybe im projecting my values on others though. which could be the problem with this whole debate.

[AppleBonker]

I'm for drug testing of handout recipients & will vote in favor of such laws when possible.

I'm for IQ testing of voters and will vote in favor of such policies when possible.

i dont think your supposed to throw out the baby. maybe im projecting my values on others though. which could be the problem with this whole debate.

Depends on how much you like bathwater.

[krimsonviper]

i dont think your supposed to throw out the baby. maybe im projecting my values on others though. which could be the problem with this whole debate.

Depends on how much you like bathwater.

Bacon flavored water.

[IBCoupe]

Depends on how much you like bathwater.

One of my favorite Stranger than Fiction exchanges, Apple:

Dustin Hoffman:
"...Hell, Harold, you could just eat nothing but pancakes if you wanted."

Will Ferrell:
"What is wrong with you? Hey, I don't want to eat nothing but pancakes; I want to live! Who in their right mind in a choice between pancakes and living chooses pancakes?"

Dustin Hoffman:
"Harold, if you'd pause to think, you'd find that the answer to that question is inextricably contingent upon the type of life being led... and of course the quality of the pancakes."