Guess how many welfare recipients tested positive in Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder’s drug test?

a reply to: GraffikPleasure

Of course if someone is high in the office and it isn't your company (Steve jobs) and it's obviously effecting the work there is no need to even drug test. Just your fired. Of coarse today that may get you sued so your probably right.

Same with industrial accidents.

There is even ways to test for marijuana if it's currently in your system with blood. Possibly saliva.


People on the dole is just a reality. It probably makes more sense to make a system that is more fair for everyone. Thats why I prefer a Basic Income. Everybody gets some of the tax money back and you cut beauracracy. Of coarse there could be any amount of problems that arise with that too when these clowns we have in office get involved. The last thing either side wants is to cut tax revanue. How else will they get rich.

You want to talk welfare. Look at Congress and their pay and benefits along with all the special favors.

Look how rich someone like Dianne Fienstein got over the years.

Maybe we should pay them on the scale of public school teachers. Both having about the same importance. No bribes either. Or super pac money whatever you want to call it.

We could probably sell Maine to Canada without effecting the economy at all. People can still go vacation there.

Every other state that tests has a high number of positive test results. The media is misleading. They'll say "out of 20,000 welfare recipients only 45 tested positive", failing to mention they only tested 200 people. Some programs themselves are messed-up, they'll ask if you have a drug problem and if you say "no" don't test you. How many druggies do you think are honest? Lmao. I'm sure these test results are being misrepresented or are outright bogus in Michigan.

a reply to: glock19

What do you do with the folks who fail?

And their kids?

How much does that cost?

A $10 test kit won't tell you squat.
My doctor pays $1,200 for gas chromatography tests that will pick up evidence and nearly every kind of drug although many of them are out of your system in just a few days.
Pot smokers are the majority of people caught using even the expensive tests.

originally posted by: bknapple32
And let me just add. Working poor is allowed the same consumed amount of marijuana as the rest of middle class america smokes. Just because someone is poor doesn't mean you get to control every dollar they spend. If someone is stuck in a rut and makes crap pay, lives on their own, and wants to spend a few sheckles a week doing something that makes them feel better in their own home, go for it bud.

I'm a bit surprised by the responses to this...but that is society today. First...until specific drugs are legalized, it is illegal to use them. If someone who is receiving money from the people is buying illegal drugs, they are either using the welfare money for the drugs or for something else to free up their money for the drugs. Regardless...they should lose their benefits.

Get over it people...illegal activity whether you agree with it or not is still illegal.

Second...if they found a thousand people abusing the system, I don't care how much it cost to discover, it needed to be discovered and they need to lose their benefits. The only way abuse of the system will stop is if the abusers are punished.

I smoke on occasion. I believe pot should be legalized for recreational use by anyone of legal age. But when some dirt ball decides to accept the financial help we offer with open hands, and then turns around and uses that money for anything that isn't a NEED...they are screwing us all and the end result (eventually) will be no helping hand for anyone. Sorry...but that is how it works. If you bite the hand the feeds you enough times, that hand isn't going to reach out with the food for long.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

How about unemployment too while we are at it.

I mean those dirtballs shouldn't have been laid off.

Forget the fact there actually aren't enough cost of living jobs available for the people who are unemployed. There aren't even enough min wage jobs to cover unemployed workers.

Again 6.8 million job openings, 8.3-30 million unemployed adults. You explain to me how the math works out.

Perfect case of the gov over taxation of corperations causing unemployment and then further enslaving the people and controlling their behaviour.

We should take their benefits for running red lights too.

Never mind the fact that the kids become wards of the state when they live on the streets which is another cost. Or if you increase crime by creating even more desperate addicts.

It's ok sure you have a solution for that too.

originally posted by: luthier
It's ok sure you have a solution for that too.

An idea I've been contemplating in my head is what if we use public funds that would otherwise go to welfare, to buy people robots that produce revenue? For example rather than Wendys buying a kiosk that takes orders, that kiosk gets rented to Wendys and the owner is a citizen who then gets to collect the check minus some fees for upgrades, repairs, etc?

It maintains a private ownership over the means of production but allows for each person to own revenue generating property.

As you point out, there aren't enough jobs to go around, but I wonder if there's enough goods to own that do work to go around.

Hypothetical question about this policy in general..

Let's say it did catch a bunch of people with traces of drugs thus making them ineligible.

Would you still bitch and moan and complain about people getting benefits?

a reply to: tothetenthpower

Welfare really needs an overhaul, it has to come with work programs or education programs so that people don't need the assistance after x number of months.

Agreed.

As someone who was forced to maneuver the food stamp/cash assistance/Medicaid gambit while waiting for disability... there is A LOT they could do to improve the system.

What they really need to do is have case workers assigned to each individual at the actual local sites. Case workers that can meet with and assess the person's needs and get them the specific help they need. Food stamps, child care and job training? Done. At the end of job training the person gets the better job they just trained for and has no need for more welfare. Or someone like me: help while waiting the 2 years it takes to get disability. Done. Now I'm set to be 'independent' from any additional welfare.

As they have it, you have to go to different locations/organizations to get the different services. They all have different requirements. No one knows WTF is going on and you get different answers depending on who you talk to. You walk in person to the office and they direct you to a computer in the corner to go through the website. The website that doesn't always work correctly. Then there's all the money wasted on sending redundant and/or unnecessary forms and letters.

For all the 'welfare mooches are just being rewarded for being lazy' folks...you have to provide proof of EVERYTHING. You can't have savings or property. You have to report to the Workforce Commission to try to find work. I don't know how it effects the outcome but I've seen questions like 'has anyone in your household been convicted of a felony?' You also have to list everyone in your household and their social security numbers. So it's not a cake walk where you just get handed wads of cash for nothing.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

How about unemployment too while we are at it.

I mean those dirtballs shouldn't have been laid off.

Forget the fact there actually aren't enough cost of living jobs available for the people who are unemployed. There aren't even enough min wage jobs to cover unemployed workers.

Again 6.8 million job openings, 8.3-30 million unemployed adults. You explain to me how the math works out.

Perfect case of the gov over taxation of corperations causing unemployment and then further enslaving the people and controlling their behaviour.

We should take their benefits for running red lights too.

Never mind the fact that the kids become wards of the state when they live on the streets which is another cost. Or if you increase crime by creating even more desperate addicts.

It's ok sure you have a solution for that too.

Dude...do you just realized that you started, fought and ended an argument solely by yourself about something I never even addressed? Good job!

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

Arrests Regarding $900 Mil Medicare Fraud

This is the REAL problem with the system. Not someone that smoked a doobie last week to try to escape their sh*t life for a minute.

originally posted by: TXRabbit
Hypothetical question about this policy in general..

Let's say it did catch a bunch of people with traces of drugs thus making them ineligible.

Would you still bitch and moan and complain about people getting benefits?

I would "bitch and complain" until the following items were addressed.

1. No spending the money on illegal activity.
2. No spending the money on luxuries.
3. No selling your "card" to others for cash to do #1 or #2.
4. The kids (if any) come first.
5. No illegals...go home.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

That's why they need case workers assigned to individuals. They would be able to identify the 'working hard to try to improve their circumstances' who may test positive for marijuana- which they may not have even spent money on...
vs.
the 'lazy crack head that's doing everything possible NOT to work'.

But then again I believe drug use falls under 'health' not 'crime' and drug rehab should be one of the welfare services provided to those that want it and are willing to work toward sobriety. A vast majority of drug abusers are suffering from mental illness and are self medicating. They really need proper diagnosis and an actual legitimate treatment plan.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
I would "bitch and complain" until the following items were addressed.

1. No spending the money on illegal activity.
2. No spending the money on luxuries.
3. No selling your "card" to others for cash to do #1 or #2.
4. The kids (if any) come first.
5. No illegals...go home.

Case workers.

An actual individual would be able to sniff out such BS. But they have no such thing, just a convoluted automatic system.

if you look at any states budget, medicare and education and transportation and pensions make up the bulk of the budget, and social programs are just a sliver, yet the republicans manage to convince people that the social programs are the problem in many states

deny ignorance indeed

a reply to: ladyvalkyrie

How much does a case worker cost 75k per person after benefits and workman's comp?

It's obvious people aren't trying to save the state money. They are trying to punish people.

Nobody has an answer for how much it would cost when these families are taken off benefits and end up on the streets what the cost of that would be. Kids become wards of the state and potentially you create a more serious desperate criminal. Or you spend the money putting them in jail.

I don't believe those results for one minute. I been around the block a few times. Something went down. I know how many people use weed and a smaller amount use crack. I bet you any money the samples were unsupervised. I know this because I am a addict in recovery for eight years.

a reply to: luthier

We could probably sell Maine to Canada without effecting the economy at all. People can still go vacation there.

There's no way am I paying Canada a tax for my lobster!

I'm not arguing for drug testing welfare recipients, but if you think that 0 out of 300 actually tested positive, then I can only laugh at your naivety. More than 1 out of every 10 people smoke pot, and that stays in your system for a long period of time. I know of someone personally, for employment reasons, who used a device that you can buy online and keep pee warm, to the exact temperature. And no, I've never had a drug test where the person monitoring watches you. They send you into a room and tell you not to flush.

Again, I don't care if people smoke pot, it should be legal anyway. But thinking that 0 people actually did drugs ...

I don't see the problem testing people for drugs before giving them free money.

I didn't realize so many people from ATS were against this logical decision.