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: 2
15
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2016 @ 11:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: KillerKell
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.

I didn't believe it either. I just said to myself, "No way." and moved on with life.




posted on Jul, 10 2016 @ 07:59 AM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

Well when you have 109 million in welfare and 5.4 million job openings you explain to me the math. Let's use the gov official unemployment for instance that's between 8-10 million. They also say between 30-90 million working adults are not working. That does include People staying home to watch kids however.

Any way you shake it there actually are not enough jobs to support Americans having a living wage by 10's of millions.

So some terrible tariff or free trade policy destroys your city and your stuck with a valueless home no one wants to buy now you get to be drug tested as well. Nice

By the wat the us is literally the only western nation that drug tests employees at a majority percent. The two most productive workforces Germany and France dont drug test. In Germany for specialized public safety concern jobs like hazards the drug test is done by a dr who analyzes the results. He then tells the employer if the person is capable of doing the job. If they have a drug concern it stays between patient and dr and the track is for recovery or rehab if it's an addiction issue.

Everywhere else this is seen as a civil liberty infringement.

Ironically we rolled over during reagan and allowed our employers to control our behaviour beyound the workplace.
edit on 10-7-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2016 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: KillerKell

Well when you have 109 million in welfare and 5.4 million job openings you explain to me the math. Let's use the gov official unemployment for instance that's between 8-10 million. They also say between 30-90 million working adults are not working. That does include People staying home to watch kids however.

Any way you shake it there actually are not enough jobs to support Americans having a living wage by 10's of millions.

So some terrible tariff or free trade policy destroys your city and your stuck with a valueless home no one wants to buy now you get to be drug tested as well. Nice

By the wat the us is literally the only western nation that drug tests employees at a majority percent. The two most productive workforces Germany and France dont drug test. In Germany for specialized public safety concern jobs like hazards the drug test is done by a dr who analyzes the results. He then tells the employer if the person is capable of doing the job. If they have a drug concern it stays between patient and dr and the track is for recovery or rehab if it's an addiction issue.

Everywhere else this is seen as a civil liberty infringement.

Ironically we rolled over during reagan and allowed our employers to control our behaviour beyound the workplace.


How does anything you wrote explain 303 Drug Test paid for with only $300?

How does anything you wrote justify that the numbers released simply don't add up?

And if you are going from a moral/ethical point on the Drug Testing in the first place... those who give you money are absolutely allowed to attach parameters to you getting that money. A Job can require you to Drug Test to keep the Job, a Parent can require you to Drug Test to keep receiving money from them... so why is the same not true when you take money from the Government?

If you want the freedom to do those drugs... then stop taking Uncle Sam's and the Tax Payers money. I'm not giving my Taxes for you to do Drugs, I'm giving my Taxes for you to pay your Light Bill and provide Food for your Family. Not for you to buy Drugs which further makes it more difficult for you to get employed due to employers doing Drug Tests.



posted on Jul, 10 2016 @ 07:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Squirlli

I call BS on your friend's claims. It's been well established that food stamps(SNAP) is a federal program that is excluded from state mandates like drug tests



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 04:02 AM
link   
I'm from Michigan and I get state assistance because I'm disabled. They cut food assistance for 200,000 disabled elderly and vets. They cut my food assistance from $200 a month to $16. It was part of the farm bill that was passed by Obama. Not only that but thanks to the affordable care act better known as Obamacare they cut my health insurance also. On top of losing my food assistance I now pay cash for my doctors visits. My monthly $850 don't go very far.

But what really grinds my gears is the abuse of the system by other people. The other day I was at the corner store and I watched a lady buy 8 ice cream cones at $3 a piece and 5 jugs of power aid with her foodstamp card. Then she paid cash for a 5th of vodka.

Also they are dumping Syrian refuges in my neighborhood. I have 3 families on my street. They have 5-6 kids each and they are getting full assistance. I've seen them use their food stamp cards. They get a house that's paid for and full assistance from the state. Meanwhile I'm one step away from being homeless. I live with my grandmother and she's been fighting breast cancer for the past few years. I'm already making plans of what to do if I become homeless. If it comes down to it and I can't get my medication I'm going to rob a pharmacy to get it. I have schizophrenia and I get extremely ill if I don't have my medication. At least in jail I can get my medication.
edit on 11-7-2016 by wantsome because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 04:11 AM
link   
a reply to: crayzeed




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*****.


...

Greed is the cause of the mindset you speak of and the greedy ones are far more sinister than those they denigrate...

ETA ...I know you know this i really just wanted to type it out......

edit on 11-7-2016 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Arizonaguy

you can call BS all you like. I know her and know that she has no reason to lie about it. You don't so you are allowed to have your own opinion.



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

I was responding to your posts about drug testing.

It's not done anywhere else like in America and it makes a few labs very wealthy.


And yeah there are not enough jobs by 10's if millions to get people off welfare. So you can blame uncle Sam for setting up the situation. Like it being better to set up over seas.

Third anytime you add beauracracy to a beauracracy money is going to go missing. Guarantee that money disappears from the budget. It's also a way to get labs rich. Especially if you invest in that lab and then sign a bill as a governor.

Personally I have never been on public assistance nor do I get drug tested.

I don't think taking money from the government who is partially if not entirely to blame for jobs disappearing (tariff laws and such) is grounds for civil liberty violations


But if you believe in nanny state stuff thTs your peragative. Just saying drug testing will add waste to waste. And it's a civil liberties violation as every other countrie in the world seems to believe as well since they don't drug test. Even pilots in Germany or France don't get tested.

Your employer does not have any right to contril what you do at home. It's none of their bussiness and a fourth amendment violation quite frankly.
edit on 11-7-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: wantsome

"When House Republicans originally argued for a food stamp cut of between $20.5 billion and $39 billion, the White House threatened to veto both of those proposals. During his Friday speech, the president did not say whether he was satisfied with the final $8.7 billion figure, or even mention the cuts at all. Instead, he praised the food stamp program and said that the final Farm Bill preserved much-needed benefits."

The republicans would have made it a lot worse. This is what compromise with republicans is like.

www.msnbc.com...



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: KillerKell

I was responding to your posts about drug testing.

It's not done anywhere else like in America and it makes a few labs very wealthy.


And yeah there are not enough jobs by 10's if millions to get people off welfare. So you can blame uncle Sam for setting up the situation. Like it being better to set up over seas.

Third anytime you add beauracracy to a beauracracy money is going to go missing. Guarantee that money disappears from the budget. It's also a way to get labs rich. Especially if you invest in that lab and then sign a bill as a governor.

Personally I have never been on public assistance nor do I get drug tested.

I don't think taking money from the government who is partially if not entirely to blame for jobs disappearing (tariff laws and such) is grounds for civil liberty violations


But if you believe in nanny state stuff thTs your peragative. Just saying drug testing will add waste to waste. And it's a civil liberties violation as every other countrie in the world seems to believe as well since they don't drug test. Even pilots in Germany or France don't get tested.

Your employer does not have any right to contril what you do at home. It's none of their bussiness and a fourth amendment violation quite frankly.


I do blame Uncle Sam for setting up the situation. Part of this Welfare is targeting Race Warfare to keep Blacks 'down'. It's why when certain Blacks tell me they support the Democrats and Clintons, I try to correct them.

We are told the Republicans (who are no better) are for the Rich and the Democrats are for the Poor. Charles Barkley famously tells a story about Politics with his mother, he being from Alabama and from a Poor Black Family. He said "Mom, I registered Republican!" She responded "Son, Republicans are only for the rich!!!" To which he responded "Momma, we ARE rich now."

Well, Democrats being for the poor isn't some White Knight... it's a program to keep Blacks ON Welfare. While this hits Lower Class, the TARGET is African Americans. If a few Hispanics and Whites fall into the trap, then it's just collateral damage.

I know, I was in the cycle (and I'm White). I got out of the cycle... but that's because apparently I wasn't educated. Hind sight taught me I'm a damn fool, because I made more on Unemployment and Food Stamps than my Disability and any Job in the area pays. Stupid me, I got a job and lost those Benefits. I took a pay cut in doing so.

So yeah, I blame Uncle Sam.

That doesn't stop me from saying, if you TAKE MONEY FROM THE GOVERNMENT then damn right the Government has the right to Drug Test you. Because that's Tax Payer Money... and I'm not giving my Taxes for some one to free load and spend on Drugs. They waste my money on enough dumb #.

Now I don't mind it going to people that need help. Hell, I needed help and I got it. What I am against is people spending that money on Drugs.

I don't even understand how anyone can argue against that (unless they make a 'weed only' argument, that should already be Legal and thus not count against them).

Because it makes no sense to say it's acceptable to spend Government Money on Illegal Drugs... that's a stupid argument. So if you take Government Money then you 100% should be mandated to take Drug Tests.

But you get no gripes from me by saying Uncle Sam is responsible for this mess. Damn right he is.



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: KillerKell

But if you believe in nanny state stuff thTs your peragative. Just saying drug testing will add waste to waste. And it's a civil liberties violation as every other countrie in the world seems to believe as well since they don't drug test. Even pilots in Germany or France don't get tested.

Your employer does not have any right to contril what you do at home. It's none of their bussiness and a fourth amendment violation quite frankly.


I mean, we can take this to an extreme. You're employer has no right to control what you do at home you say. Nor does the Government.

So as long as you keep Rape and Murder inside your home... cool. No problems. Meth Lab... just make sure you have it in your residence. Sex Trafficking is cool as well. You know, just make sure it doesn't leave your Residence.

I mean, civil liberties and all. Right?

Sounds stupid, doesn't it? It's because it is. Obviously, those things are wrong, criminal, and should not be tolerated by Society. So it doesn't matter WHERE you do them, they are still wrong.

An Employer should absolutely have the right to not retain Drug Users. Since to acquire Illegal Drugs, one must Purchase Illegal Drugs... which puts one at risk of Arrest. On that basis alone, an Employer should have a right to Drug Test Employees.

The same goes for Welfare. What purpose does it serve to give Federal Aid to those who use that money to commission a Crime?

Where is the logic? Why is it acceptable for TAX PAYER MONEY to be spent by Citizens in the commission of a Crime?

Please, make a case for that.



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

Perhaps you don't understand the fourth.

It means yes they can't put cameras in your home to stop domestic violence.

It means you can't be searched without probable cause.

It's ok I understand the confusion.

My logic is its none of anyone's business what people do in private and trying to nanny them is only making the process more expensive and beurocratic.

Personally i am for a basic income and the elimination of the welfare and ssi system.

However we are literally the only western nation doing drug testing. It's a Reagan drug war hold over (52 billion on the war on drugs per year which has done zero)..

If you follow the pathway of logic it doesn't make sense.

Spend more on welfare to do the tests then what when a mom or dad fails? The kids get punished or become wards of the state?

No I am far more concerned with thw wasted money in Washington then the poor on welfare which was created by Washington when they sold out the countries labour market. Funny how welfare and Nixon opening up China trade went hand in hand. Before then min wage could buy house



posted on Jul, 11 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: KillerKell

Perhaps you don't understand the fourth.

It means yes they can't put cameras in your home to stop domestic violence.

It means you can't be searched without probable cause.

It's ok I understand the confusion.

My logic is its none of anyone's business what people do in private and trying to nanny them is only making the process more expensive and beurocratic.

Personally i am for a basic income and the elimination of the welfare and ssi system.

However we are literally the only western nation doing drug testing. It's a Reagan drug war hold over (52 billion on the war on drugs per year which has done zero)..

If you follow the pathway of logic it doesn't make sense.

Spend more on welfare to do the tests then what when a mom or dad fails? The kids get punished or become wards of the state?

No I am far more concerned with thw wasted money in Washington then the poor on welfare which was created by Washington when they sold out the countries labour market. Funny how welfare and Nixon opening up China trade went hand in hand. Before then min wage could buy house


It becomes some ones business when they invest in you. When they are the means of your income. Yes, then it IS their business. That comes with the agreement of taking money from them.

I'm not saying put cameras in your house. But I am saying if you line up for a check, you should have no problem lining up to pee in a cup for that check. Especially when the check is being paid by Tax Payers.

That's the difference.

Look, if I'm not paying your light bill and putting the food on your table... don't pee in a cup for me. But if you are going to extend your hand and take that money from me... then agreeing to pee in a cup shouldn't be an issue.

I'm not coming into your house... you're coming to me for money. That's not any invasion on you, I'm not coming into your home. You applied to ME (the Government, in this example) for Money.

That's the difference. No one is going into anyone's home here. No one is setting up cameras.

But, if you are going to come out of your home and ask Uncle Sam for a Check this Month... well now you aren't in your house, your in line asking for money. So while there, might as well pee in that cup. (And yes, I know those Checks go right to accounts today, the standing in line for the check isn't so much reality today.)

Now, I'm not sure what is wrong with this stance. I'm not breaching your home. I'm just ensuring you aren't using Illegal Drugs while taking Government Money that YOU REQUESTED.

What's wrong with that?



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

"It becomes some ones business when they invest in you. When they are the means of your income. Yes, then it IS their business. That comes with the agreement of taking money from them."

"What's wrong with that?"

Your argument reminds me of a pimp's negotiation. Seriously, we are talking giving up body fluids to complete strangers under duress.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

Uh no. It costs more money to add drug testing.

The results have not been good.

What do you do with the drug using moms and dads and the kids?

There are not enough jobs to get people off welfare out of the 109 million welfare takers there are a total of 5.4 million jobs of every kind available

You explain why 103.6 million people need to be tested for drugs when political economic decisions created a job market problem to begin with.

No sir it's just a way these labs and their investors in government get rich.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: KillerKell

"It becomes some ones business when they invest in you. When they are the means of your income. Yes, then it IS their business. That comes with the agreement of taking money from them."

"What's wrong with that?"

Your argument reminds me of a pimp's negotiation. Seriously, we are talking giving up body fluids to complete strangers under duress.


It's like this. When Mommy and Daddy raise you, you get the Roof and the Food... you follow the Rules.

So if you aren't supporting yourself, you take Money from the Government... follow the rules.

You want to do Illegal Drugs? Fine. Don't take Government Money.

What's wrong with that? If you want to take Illegal Drugs... support your self. Pay your own way for your own addiction.

The Welfare is for you to pay your light bill, buy food. Not to buy Illegal Drugs.

What is so difficult to comprehend about that?



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 04:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: KillerKell

Uh no. It costs more money to add drug testing.

The results have not been good.

What do you do with the drug using moms and dads and the kids?

There are not enough jobs to get people off welfare out of the 109 million welfare takers there are a total of 5.4 million jobs of every kind available

You explain why 103.6 million people need to be tested for drugs when political economic decisions created a job market problem to begin with.

No sir it's just a way these labs and their investors in government get rich.


What do you do with the Drug Using Moms and Dads???

Ever hear of something called 'Personal Responsibility'? If you need Welfare, what the # are you doing wasting Money on Illegal Drugs?

Sometimes, you have to let people fail. If they choose Drugs over Food and Family... that's their choice.

Think maybe if instead of buying drugs some of these people pooled that money together they might could start a business? And thus then be able to Employ some people? To which then we might get even more off Unemployment?

There is NO RESPONIBLE STANCE for people on Welfare buying Illegal Drugs. There is not a logical case for it.

I do believe Illegal Drugs would fall under Luxury... if you are Poor, you don't have the Disposable Income for Luxuries. So if you put Drugs before Family and Food... then you are a piece of # that doesn't deserve my Tax Payer Dollars. Of course, you don't deserve Family or Food if you put Drugs over them.

No defense for it. Why should Tax Payers be supporting Drug Addicts? Where is that my responsibility? My responsibility is to help my fellow citizen. Clothes, sure. Power, Roof, sure. Food, sure.

Drugs? # you. Get your own money if you want Drugs, don't spend mine on it.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: KillerKell

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: KillerKell

"It becomes some ones business when they invest in you. When they are the means of your income. Yes, then it IS their business. That comes with the agreement of taking money from them."

"What's wrong with that?"

Your argument reminds me of a pimp's negotiation. Seriously, we are talking giving up body fluids to complete strangers under duress.


It's like this. When Mommy and Daddy raise you, you get the Roof and the Food... you follow the Rules.

So if you aren't supporting yourself, you take Money from the Government... follow the rules.

You want to do Illegal Drugs? Fine. Don't take Government Money.

What's wrong with that? If you want to take Illegal Drugs... support your self. Pay your own way for your own addiction.

The Welfare is for you to pay your light bill, buy food. Not to buy Illegal Drugs.

What is so difficult to comprehend about that?


Also, I support Tax Payer Money going to Rehabilitation. Absolutely. Job Training. Damn right. That helps my fellow man.

But paying for their Illegal Drugs (which are, by the way, ILLEGAL)... # that. This doesn't better some one in any way.



posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

What is wrong with it, is you have to sign away your civil rights. It is an invasion of privacy and an assumption of guilt before any money is given out or earned.



posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: KillerKell

There is a difference between accusing someone of using drugs which is what a test is and testing someone who appears to be on drugs or has been suspected of being on drugs.

Apparently you believe that public assistance means you get to have rights violated.

So big brother can make some trade and tariff laws that effect the job market destroy millions of jobs put half the public in welfare and then start telling them how they can live their lives. That sounds like slavery.

No one else in the world drug tests like the us and their workforces do just fine. They also protect the invasion of privacy and reserve drug tests for actual probable cause.

So you can't smoke a joint at your cousin's BBQ because you get tested for welfare.

Then your kids can pay the price for their parents.

If you are suggesting an actual system to help the poor I am with you.

However that would require considerably more work than a drug test.

It would require actual physicians to interpret the drug test with a physical and mental survey and create a mental health and recovery program.

In other words more money, thought, and time than is being suggested.

This drug test is really just about goverments contracts and giving the taxpayer money as wellfare to corperations like Quest labs.

That is the type of wellfare I am concerned about. The massive waste in these taxpayer contracts. Especially if people are siphoning off the funds which is what happens when you make giant government beauracracies.

Just give everyone a basic income and get rid of all social programs. Non profit rehabs get tax breaks as do companies willing to open in tougher city areas.

Try creating incentives rather than treating everyone as criminals because they may be lifer on wellfare or just soneone taken to the cleaners by a wife, husband, scammer etc and lost job.

Remember the government is ever bit responsible for economic planning and this job market has created 109 million depended on the government. If anything we should be testing congress for more than just drugs and kicking them off welfare.
edit on 13-7-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
15
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join