It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Michigan's Welfare "Drug Test"

page: 1
15
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 04:43 AM
link   
In another post, people rallied behind the wonderful people of Michigan in what they felt was an unjust over-reach of Michigan's Gov. Rick Snyder.

I don't know Rick. I don't care about Rick.

I do know Basic Math.

Some wing... not sure which because I don't know which wing Rick is on... is attack Snyder for his Welfare Drug Test Program, which isn't even done yet by the way.

Here is a Link to our own ATS for that full conversation.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Now, some feel Welfare and other Government Assistances shouldn't come with the 'price tag' of Drug Tests. Some feel this way because they don't want Tax Payer Money to go to it. Others feel it's unfair to those having to take the Drug Test.

That's fine, my issue is with neither group... though personally, if you are going to take Uncle Sam Money you probably shouldn't be spending it on Drugs. But hey, let's ignore that for now.

Here is the piece in which who ever is opposed to Gov. Snyder published:
www.rawstory.com...

By the way, our very own Poster tothetenthpower started that thread and provided that link.

But I found something interesting. They are blasting Rick because 0 of 303 Tested were Negative. I mean, okay. Cool. Let's suspend the fact that any group of 300 Random People with no prior knowledge will likely get at least one kid who hit a doobie. That's with total disregard to Race or Socio-Economic. You don't get 0%... hell, you wouldn't get that if you Tested the White House.

But let's suspend our belief for a second and say "Sure, out of 303 real breathing people... 0 tested Positive for Drugs". Let's ACCEPT that premise.

So then what am I mad about? Why is this post here?

Taxpayers gave $300,000 for this Program.

Am I made they gave that much? Nope. Not at all.

The Program has spent $300.

"The pilot program ends on Sept. 30 and received $300,000 in state funding, although a spokesperson for the state health department said only $300 had been spent thus far. "

The STATE HEALTH DEPARMENT says $300 has been spent.

Now, Cornell University tells me that the Average Cost of a Drug Test in the US is $48. I know I had to pay (taken out of my Check at Work) $150. The US Army pays around $300 PER TEST, and they do the testing themselves! Some High End Corporations pay $1,500. That's for ONE Drug Test.

From US Mobile Drug Testing the average Hair Speciman Test is $115-$150. Urine Tests cost $40. The absolute LOWEST is $15 per Person.

www.howmuchisit.org...

So explain to me how 303 people TOOK 303 Drug Tests on $300.

That's what I'm pissed about. It's painfully obvious that Drug Tests don't happen at $0.99 a pop. Which is why I think SOME ONE is trying to pull some wool on the Gov.

Again, I give two craps about the guy. I live in Alabama. He affects me none at all.

But when I see a claim that 303 People were Tested, 0 were Positive... and only $300 was spent... I call BS. At the absolute cheapest of $15 a pop, $300 gets you 20 Drug Tests. And I can see 20 people being Negative.

But they are trying to sell the American Public on 303 Tests for $300 USD and 0 Positives.

How much more blatant can something be?




posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 05:58 AM
link   
I don´t know the prices of drug tests in the US, but here in germany you can buy drug(the same they use in opem prisons) tests at the pharmacy for 5 euros or less, for one test. If you are the government, you don´t buy only one test, you maybe buy several hundreds, thousands, tenthousands, what makes them even cheaper.

But, drugtests on "welfare"(what the US thinks is welfare) recipients? Why don´t you force them to wear yellow stars?
First the people have to test all the individuals in power for drug abuse, especially for cocain and alcohol!
When those drug addicted there are punished and removed from their positions in power, maybe then someone can demand drugtests from a taxpayer, maybe! But i don´t think so!

And 0 of 303 is BS, i believe too. Not even a coffe, a beer, medicines or a cigarette? Ah, i forgot, this ain´t drugs...


edit on 9 7 2016 by DerBeobachter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 06:03 AM
link   
when I was probation we would pee in a cup, they guy would stick some cardboard thing in it and voila... They didnt charge for that, other than court costs and fees... so maybe they kinda did, but if you could buy 10's of thousands of those tests I'm guessing you'd get them pretty cheap.

Same thing with drug tests at work. Those don't cost me a thing. Just stick that cardboard thing into the cup. Not sending it out to a lab for some crazy scientist to gas fire spectromometer the stuff.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Drugs are one thing. How bout piercings , tattoos , iphones , cars....



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

When I give away body parts and fluids, I always thought they should pay me.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

Right! when those gay a$$ rims cost more than the whole car ( which happens to be a late 90's model of something, like a Taurus)! I have a couple teens that live near by who have a car like this, every time I see it I just SMH and laugh, especially when I get the oh so "sexy" waz up" head nod.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

Or You could be like the Gov. of Fl. who undercut the Fl. hospitals at the avg. of $116 by selling •Required drug tests for $34.00 at His Private Business, Quick-Care™.

This is the same guy who bamboozled some $400M USD in a Healthcare scheme in Alabama and then spent $75M of it to be Gov. which pays $237k/yr.

Incidentally 3.2% tested "Positive" for drugs. This number was deemed to be "too low" so after a recount, which Flori-Duh leads the Nation in re-counts, that number was indeed incorrect, actually only 2.7% 'positive'...

How about "Corporate Welfare"? The Miami based journalist, Carl Hiassen, offered to pay for Drug Tests for the whole Florida Legislature. Guess what? They ALL refused...



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a very close friend of mine, ( from Michigan ) is on Food stamps only. ( if her deadbeat, lowlife, scumbag, abusive,D**kwad, of an ex husband would pay child support like he is supposed to she wouldn't be). She works fulltime and still barely makes ends meet even with her food stamps. She was tested.

Now she smokes marijuana. She has pain from being beaten by the ex bones broken and lingering pain after healing. She doesn't pay for it, her brother has his license to grow medically, or for a dispensary or whatever. He can grow so much legally. He gives her so much a month, nothing more.

I asked her about it, and she said that all they did was send out a letter in the mail, and said that she needed to be tested, if she didn't make time to be tested then they would not renew her benefits. They gave her a date range and said see you there. So she took time off work, and showed up on one of the days allotted and stood in line for about 4 hours. They did a cheek swab. That was it.

If you smoke marijuana and the extent of the drug test is a cheek swab, stop smoking the night before and you will pass with flying colors. It may even be less time than that. Honestly I don't know how many kinds of drugs they can test for with a cheek swab, but I doubt it's very many.

Now the people with the fancy cars, and phones, and clothes and other gadgets who shouldn't be able to afford those, while on welfare, are the one that sell the drugs. That's where their income comes from, it can't be traced so it can't be counted as income as far as the state is concerned. The real dealers don't use their product, they grow/acquire and sell for profit, that's it. They won't show up positive on a test, because they don't use.

These are the people cheating the system.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

It just goes to show adding more beauracracy into top of more beauracracy just makes a mess.

Welfare is already a bureaucratic mess.

Also a drug test should be analyzed by a dr and the information protected under hippa since its a medical procedure. The dr should be the one telling your job what the results mean.

As for welfare no way. We have 109 people on some kind of welfare, 8-90 million not working at all depending on how account for it and 5.4 million jobs available/open.

So there are no where near enough jobs even in a perfect everyone filling every position.

The policy in Washington has everything to do with all these things.

Not the poor.

But yes when you add to a beauracracy you get fuzzy math and disapearing money.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Specific drug test cost around a 1$. We have all sorts of the at the dollar store. Now who knows what quality these test are to save money



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Squirlli

I don't like the idea of a cheek swab, I'd rather pee in a cup. Sounds like it will be used for DNA records if they are swabbing.

Our governor "Dick" is one tough nerd isn't he?
edit on 9-7-2016 by MichiganSwampBuck because: typo



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

you can still technically get DNA from a cup of pee. epithelial cells and all. ( ewwww)

He is some kind of special, and that is all I will say on that matter.

I don't currently live in Michigan ( military wife ) but home is home and always will be.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

The budget math didn't work for me either, 300 tested at a total cost of $300?!?. It costs more than that. Even the staff to administer that would be more.
edit on 9-7-2016 by pavil because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: KillerKellThat's all well and good but what about the people doing the testing? How many are they on say $50000 a year.
As for all you people lambasting welfare recipients, how about we make them wear red patches on their coats and if they test possitive for drugs they have to wear a yellow patch along side the red one. That's sarcasm you sanctimonious bas*****.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: tinner07
when I was probation we would pee in a cup, they guy would stick some cardboard thing in it and voila... They didnt charge for that, other than court costs and fees... so maybe they kinda did, but if you could buy 10's of thousands of those tests I'm guessing you'd get them pretty cheap.

Same thing with drug tests at work. Those don't cost me a thing. Just stick that cardboard thing into the cup. Not sending it out to a lab for some crazy scientist to gas fire spectromometer the stuff.


But they spent $300... so I don't think they bought thousands and thousands of them to get some huge discount.

Had they spent say $300,000... then you could interest me in a conversation about Economy of Scale.

But not with $300.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 06:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jordan River
Specific drug test cost around a 1$. We have all sorts of the at the dollar store. Now who knows what quality these test are to save money


From what I posted, only Alcohol Tests get as low as $1, in that $1 to $10 Range.

The OTC stuff, from the article, is $10 to $30.

It is also explained that these test for the fewest amount of drugs with the highest amount of error. So the quality of those tests ARE known... they lack quality.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: KillerKellThat's all well and good but what about the people doing the testing? How many are they on say $50000 a year.
As for all you people lambasting welfare recipients, how about we make them wear red patches on their coats and if they test possitive for drugs they have to wear a yellow patch along side the red one. That's sarcasm you sanctimonious bas*****.




Lambasting?

Your job can tell you not to do drugs or you'll be fired, and that they will test you for Drugs.

But the Government giving people to live, replacing their job... they can't do the same?

Explain the logic.

If I am a Parent and I tell my Child who is the age of a Man that I will pay his Power Bill, but he WILL be tested once a Month and if he fails I cut him off... that's fine, no?

Because the idea is "We are giving you money, you are ACCEPTING the money, don't use Illegal Drugs while under this agreement".

So those of you trying to act like this is Government over stepping their bounds... bull #. It's Government footing the bill... actually it's me and you footing the bill through taxes.

I'd much rather we not test Welfare... because I'd much rather there be no Welfare. Then, when they aren't taking any money from Uncle Sam they can do what the hell ever they want.

But as long as they are taking our Tax Dollars... they shouldn't be doing drugs. Period.

Now we can have a separate debate on if Marijuana should be legal or not, I think it should be and that Colorado and some other States are doing the right thing. So sure, I give a pass to some one busted for Weed.

But after that, I got no more passes to give. You want to do Drugs... get off Welfare, get a Job, and try your luck doing Drugs while employed with them. I'm fine with that.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: MichiganSwampBuck
a reply to: Squirlli

I don't like the idea of a cheek swab, I'd rather pee in a cup. Sounds like it will be used for DNA records if they are swabbing.

Our governor "Dick" is one tough nerd isn't he?


I'm in no way defending the guy, I'm sure he's a douche to come under such scrutiny anyways.

But wrong is wrong, and those who were championing the 'See, our Poor don't do drugs!' 'proved' this with some very questionable math.

Like I was taught in school, if you are going to cheat... don't get a 100. It's not even REASONABLE to believe that 303 People were 100% Negative, in any demographic. But like I said, we can suspend believe on that one and say "Man, that Randomness got really lucky today" and this whole thing STILL doesn't add up.

But that the Program has only spent $300 out of $300,000 is a concern... and that you can't get 303 Drug Tests out of $300 is a concern.

So I'd like to know what the hell is going on with BOTH of these facts. Why is ONLY 0.1% of the Funds used? The People gave $300,000 to do some proper testing here, why isn't it being done? And how were 303 people Tested at $1.00 a pop, when $300 isn't enough for Economy of Scale to kick in the possible get the Tests to that price Range (which buying 1 Million Tests wouldn't make $10 Tests as low as $1... so, you know... getting $1 Urine Tests ain't happening on 300K either).

And why are more people not raising hell about either, or both, points?



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

Like I said in that thread. They set aside $300k, they've currently spent $300. Basically what it means is they were going to test 300 people as a pilot study to see if it was viable to test the population at large. Then they tested a fragment of that sample. That fragment seems to be one person, which is how you get 0% because it's either 100% or 0%.



posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 11:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: KillerKell

Like I said in that thread. They set aside $300k, they've currently spent $300. Basically what it means is they were going to test 300 people as a pilot study to see if it was viable to test the population at large. Then they tested a fragment of that sample. That fragment seems to be one person, which is how you get 0% because it's either 100% or 0%.


But that's not what they SAID. They SAID they tested 303 People, and 303 People were Negative.

Which is where my issue begins.

Also, the entire $300K is for the 'Pilot Program'... so now they are running a Pilot ON the Pilot.

NONE of this add up, yet people were quick to decry the Gov. "Haha, Gov! We told you so! Doesn't matter that NOTHING in what's been released made sense, we proved you so wrong you evil bad man!"

I don't care about Michigan's Governor... but since when has the ATS, we who propose to be "Seekers of Truth" used some bush league material as this obviously flawed report to support our agenda against some one?

In fact, this type of Report is EXACTLY the kind of thing we as Civic Minded Truth Seekers are meant to rally AGAINST.

But instead the vast majority of that other Thread SUPPORTED the report so they could wail away at the Gov.




top topics



 
15
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join