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.
Originally posted by GhostR1der
reply to post by mopusvindictus
AMEN right back at ya
Another point I wish to raise...
The cost of testing (especially in triple confirmations etc) would probably be more than the cost saved getting people off welfare who were abusing substances. If they truly cared about welfare they'd stop spending (sorry: printing) lots of money to fund their excessive and wasteful military budget.
2c
I would like to define the word addiction for you, since you seem to not know what it is.
Addiction =Psychological and bodily dependence on a substance or practice which is beyond voluntary control
beyond voluntary control is the keyword here...yes some people choose to take the first rush and the next couple, sure...but when you get hooked its a totally different matter and you need help.
I am disappointed to see people wanting to take away welfare from the people in most need of help.
The most of your tax money doesnt go to welfare, but to warbudgets!
What happened to responsibility for our fellow humans? What happened to valueing people higher than money?
Where is the love?
Originally posted by styxxz
Originally posted by Amaterasu
How would you feel about denying someone benefits merely because they ate a poppy seed bagel?
The unemployed shouldn't be eating bagels. Their benefits should only cover the necessaries like bread and water not treats
So you tell me why ANYONE should be drug tested.
Drugs are bad mm'kay
Originally posted by LateApexer313
Thank you so much for making this thread!
I had to take a drug test to get the day time job I have now, and am randomly "eligible" for my continuing employment and paycheck, why should that not apply to those on the government teat? I haven't read the responses to this thread, I am going back right now to see if there's even an argument AGAINST this...if there is, I can't wait to read it, and shoot it down!
Johnson's vision of a "temporary" investment to help the poor become self-sufficient and climb into the economic mainstream has turned into abureaucratic and fiscal nightmare whose total cost has been calculated at $5.4 trillion.
School-based Early Education Reduces Child Abuse and Neglect. Each year, approximately three million cases of suspected child abuse and neglect are reported to U.S. child welfare agencies. Estimated federal and state expenditures on child welfare services exceed $11 billion. Approximately 30 percent of confirmed cases of child abuse result in placement of children outside the home, at a yearly cost of $22,000 or more.[1]
NEW YORK -- Divorce and out-of-wedlock childbearing cost U.S. taxpayers more than $112 billion a year, according to a study commissioned by four groups advocating more government action to bolster marriages.
, around $501 billion has been spent based on estimates of current expenditure rates[1], which range from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) estimate of $2 billion per week[2] to $12 billion a month, an estimate by economist Joseph Stiglitz.[3]
Traffic accidents cost the Washington area more than $5 billion a year in property damage, medical costs, travel delays and lost productivity, according to a report released today by AAA.
Hugh Kaufman, senior policy analyst for emergency response at the Environmental Protection Agency, said New Orleans may need one of the largest public building programmes ever seen in the US at a cost of $80-100bn - approximately the same as the yearly cost of the war in Iraq. /ex]
www.guardian.co.uk...
Originally posted by asmeone2
Originally posted by GhostR1der
reply to post by mopusvindictus
AMEN right back at ya
Another point I wish to raise...
The cost of testing (especially in triple confirmations etc) would probably be more than the cost saved getting people off welfare who were abusing substances. If they truly cared about welfare they'd stop spending (sorry: printing) lots of money to fund their excessive and wasteful military budget.
2c
Let me ask you though, how do you know who is on drugs without testing for it?
That's why it's all the more important to overhaul the food stamp system and limit it to basic ingrediants. People will learn to eat healthfully if they are limited to healthy ingrediants.
Originally posted by mopusvindictus
reply to post by damurph
Those people agree to testing in return for a Job they requested
I have never applied to a job that tested in my life even if entirely sober.
Originally posted by iceofspades
One of my friend's mothers is on welfare. She still has two kids at home. She has some disabling mental issues, and dealing with those with a job while having to raise her children would be near impossible.
She has tried many different prescriptions to deal with her issues, but they do nothing but harm her. At one point she was having seizures from her meds. The only thing that works to cure her ills is a plant that starts with M.
Can anyone tell me the justice in her losing the source of income which feeds her children because the poisonous prescriptions her doctors give her don't help? I can't. No drug testing---absolutely not (or just legalize the plant I mentioned above).
[edit on 8/20/2008 by iceofspades]