drug testing people on welfare rant.....

[SullivanRacing06]

redistributing wealth is a horrible idea, if you make more money then someone else you should be taxed equally....

want free money take a god damm drug test!

[AZhitman]

Given that most of the people who argue for drug testing would also be the ones to yell that we're turning into a socialist nation, why is it that the answer to the perceived problem of your wealth being redistributed is to strip some of the rights of more people?

I'd turn that around.

Why is it that the answer to the perceived problem of some people not having enough money to survive is to forcibly take it (where I'm from, they call it stealing) from other people?

Ah, but then we're back on the question of whether it should exist in the first place.

IBC, to answer your question of "why do you want to withhold public funds from people who use illicit substances?"
(I'm gonna go very off-the-cuff here - almost dinnertime and my blood sugar is low...):

Because it's an "unspoken contract" with the people who fund your continued existence. There's an expectation, a trust, that welfare (literally, to "fare well") is reserved for those who are most in need (and to a somewhat lesser extent, deserving). We're a bootstrap nation - We can be very generous, but there's expectations involved: ONE of those expectations being that you (the welfare recipient) will not be a burden on society WHILE you're being a burden on society.

If I choose to be charitable (and I am), it's my right to be somewhat selective in directing my assistance. That RIGHT has been stripped from me with welfare.

Argue it all day long - I don't change course often, and you've already witnessed my one "shift" for the year.

[SullivanRacing06]

why is it still such a hard concept of if your getting handed free money you can take a simple drug test to prove your not blowing it on illegal substances.. sound like a fair deal to me. prove your clean and you will continue to receive your free money.

[AppleBonker]

I'd turn that around.

Why is it that the answer to the perceived problem of some people not having enough money to survive is to forcibly take it (where I'm from, they call it stealing) from other people?

Ah, but then we're back on the question of whether it should exist in the first place.

Pretty much the answer I was looking for. The best argument should be that revamping the system wont work and it should be abolished or we should start from scratch. I don't want IBC to yell at me so I'll basically leave it at that. It just seems like the perfect opportunity to argue for the removal of a system that none of you feel works. I wasn't necessarily expecting that response, but it seems like that should be the better debate.

[AZhitman]

I'll be considering this as a litmus test of candidates in the coming months (and 2012). There will be others, and this certainly isn't the most critical, but it's important.

[SullivanRacing06]

hopefully florida will not be the only state with a Representative that thinks this is a good idea

[IBCoupe]

Apple, I won't yell at you. I'll just shave some powdered doughnuts into an envelope...

Because it's an "unspoken contract" with the people who fund your continued existence. There's an expectation, a trust, that welfare (literally, to "fare well") is reserved for those who are most in need (and to a somewhat lesser extent, deserving). We're a bootstrap nation - We can be very generous, but there's expectations involved: ONE of those expectations being that you (the welfare recipient) will not be a burden on society WHILE you're being a burden on society.

The assumption being that someone who tests positive for drugs is necessarily additionally burdensome?

If I choose to be charitable (and I am), it's my right to be somewhat selective in directing my assistance. That RIGHT has been stripped from me with welfare.

That's not how public goods work. This came up last night when talking about environmental regulation.
I might say, "Hey, you know what? I live in the middle of the country, I don't need a national defense. Tim wants one, why not make him pay for it?"
I might say, "Hey, you know what? I don't mind dirty air. Tim wants to clean it, why not make him pay for it?"
I might say, "Hey, you know what? I don't mind the starvation of the poor; that's social darwinism, baby! Tim's got a problem with it, why not make him pay for it?"

And then later, I'll say, "Man, I really am enjoying the lack of scattered dead poor people, the clean air, and the non-being-blown-up-ness. Good on you, Tim, for paying that, but I'd still be okay either way."

When it comes to projects designed to benefit the public at large, you don't have the right to be selective with your assistance. The public might, as a whole, and if everybody agrees with you this doesn't matter, but you, as an individual, do not.

[AppleBonker]

I'll be considering this as a litmus test of candidates in the coming months (and 2012). There will be others, and this certainly isn't the most critical, but it's important.

Good thing I'm not running for office...

Apple, I won't yell at you. I'll just shave some powdered doughnuts into an envelope...

That's too passive-aggressive. I do not approve.

[IBCoupe]

Good thing I'm not running for office...

[wingFeather]

you are a moron.

Takes one to know one, sugar hole

More substance, less bumper-sticker one-liners.

Applebonker doesn't read posts, so why bother spending a great amount of time typing one out for him?

[AppleBonker]

Good thing I'm not running for office...

Not yet, anyway. Amirite?

Takes one to know one, sugar hole

Whoa, man. What makes you think you know anything about my hole?

why bother spending a great amount of time typing one out for him?

Comedic value?

[IBCoupe]

We'll see how many bad things I say on the internet...

[Encryptshun]

I don't think many on here could still run for public office if the formus is admissable as evidence.

I'm pretty convinced we could all be on some watch-list(s) already.

Big Brother isn't just watching, he's scratching his head and saying "WTF are these people smoking?"

[AppleBonker]

Be careful what you get photographed doing as well. I've got photos of friends that were poli sci and law majors that I'm hanging on to purely for blackmail purposes.

Side question for masters of the English language: Should that previous sentence read "hanging onto" or "hanging on to"? I think I've got it right, but as I've said before, I'm an engineer so the whole language thing throws me.

[Encryptshun]

Side question for masters of the English language: Should that previous sentence read "hanging onto" or "hanging on to"? I think I've got it right, but as I've said before, I'm an engineer so the whole language thing throws me.

Neither. You should not end a clause with a preposition. Rather, your sentence should read:

"I've got photos of friends who were poli sci and law majors on to which I'm hanging purely for blackmail purposes."

But talking like that is apt to get your *ss kicked for being pretentious.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Side question for masters of the English language: Should that previous sentence read "hanging onto" or "hanging on to"? I think I've got it right, but as I've said before, I'm an engineer so the whole language thing throws me.

The latter. You're not hanging onto. Onto is not being hung. But the object is being hung on to. I think, anyway.

[IBCoupe]

I've heard that, technically-speaking, the "no prepositions at the end of a sentence" thing isn't actually a rule. Of.

[AZhitman]

I love it when Greg pulls out his singular experience to crush everyone.

BTW, Arizona's probation system is a joke.

More unqualified drivel from someone who knows very little about the topic.

OK, Dave, let's hear your expert assessment on why it's "a joke" (whatever that means)... Don't disappoint me.

[IBCoupe]

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.

He already did, Greg.

If you believe him.

[wingFeather]

Too many political discussions here for a General Chat thread.

[SullivanRacing06]

hopefully he gets elected and attempts to put this into law....