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.

 

States Consider Drug Tests for Welfare Recipients

page: 18
33
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 08:38 AM
link   
If the system worked as it was intended to,as set up by the founding fathers of this nation,these problems would be occurring everywhere else in the world,but not here.

Before the FED,there was no need for a welfare system,most people had a job,and could save their own money for their retirement.

Families actually functioned well enough that retirement homes and daycare centers didn't even exist.

You people really need to study more,instead of just voicing your venomous opinions formed by the flawed beliefs of those running their mouths on the tube.

Just go watch Jerry Springer,and then look at how people act on the street.

I even see it here on a thread headline,something about Celente on video,the title ended with "priceless",like a goddamned master card (?) commercial.

originality and clear thought would be priceless.

Not much -o- that 2 B found here though...........

You need to find the truth yourselves.




posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 08:44 AM
link   
All people need to ask themselves these questions:

What is in my head?.

Who put it there?.

How did they put it there?.

Why did they put it there?.

If you are truly honest with yourself,you might have a different attitude about a lot of things.

If you have a propensity to drug or alcohol use,you may not want to do any of the above.

Nevermind



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   
I am going to go and listen to Paul McCartney&Wings now,"live and let die",and really try to remember when I was young,and my heart was an open book.

[edit on 28-3-2009 by chiponbothshoulders]



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Seems like a post of mine has gone missing somewhere?
Very strange.

So again.

The ignorance here amazes me, yet again and I now it shouldn't.

The majority of people on benefit are NOT drug abusers or drug addicts.
Some maybe casual and social users.
A massive difference but one that some people just don't seem to want to understand.

The 'get off your fat lazy arse and go and find a job' displayed here by many is insulting and is based on prejudice not reality.
Do you live in the same world as me?
I suspect not because guess what?
Here in my world there are no #ing jobs, people are being laid off in there droves every single day.
I see people losing hope along with their self pride and dignity.
These people want to work, but there simply isn't anything and they are being forced into a life of crime to simply survive.
That is the reality of my world.
They, like all of us, have been screwed over.

In addition, many are on benefit due to illnesses beyond their control.
Should we marginalise them as well?

I do not deny that there are people on benefit who abuse the system and think they are somehow owed something and it is their right to receive benefits despite contributing absolutely nothing positive to society whatsoever.
These people should be routed out and either their benefits withdrawn or forced to do public work.
But it is the benefit system and those who dictate policy who are fault and need changing.
And guess what, those who dictate policy are the self same people who have shafted us all, who screwed the global economy and who seek to limit our civil liberties and control every aspect of our lives.
Direct your anger and rage at them, not the needy and unfortunate or those who just have a different lifestyle to you.





[edit on 28/3/09 by Freeborn]



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Finally,the BIG "M" word comes up.

Marginalization is simply descrimination,BIGOTRY!!.

This country is being pried apart from within,at the molecular level.
You and me are the molecules.

Most of the topics discussed here really do nothing but lead you off in the wrong direction,WHO BENEFITS?.

Who really lives parasitically off of the "taxpayer"?.

Be careful,don't give it too much thought.

Just stop,get together with a million fishermen,go fishing WITHOUT a LICENSE,and when they come,just flip em off.

same with driving.

same with getting married.

same with everything.

Is it right that before you can do anything,you have to pay them first?.

Do you expect it would be easier to get by if you didn't have to pay them before you could do ANYTHING?.

Really though,if we came together with a common goal,who could stop us?.

But ya gotta OPEN YOUR EYES,or you might fall in the water.

[edit on 28-3-2009 by chiponbothshoulders]



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 09:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


Throughout history,over and over,the weak are targeted because they cannot defend themselves.

I see it every day on the street,and it takes all of my willpower to keep from reacting to change it,to fight it.....

The weak:
homeless
unemployed
ugly
drunk
criminals (in this system we all are,we are just unruly colonists you know)
elderly
disabled
overweight
bicyclists
mentally impaired
animals
Anybody who is different than yourself.
ANYBODY WHO MAKES YOU WONDER.

I find this world endlessly frustrating,in that too many people in it,are just plain stupid.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   
I doubt that welfare recipients will be drug tested.
Too many illegals receiving assistance and we wouldn't wanna expose and have to deal with them now would we.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   
When they started requiring SS numbers for Welfare guess what? There was a drop in welfare getters. Why? Because they'd be collecting more then one check under different names.

DRUG TEST! Make them choose between drugs and welfare.

Also, ban the having of welfare checks once they're on. If they're on welfare make them take BC so they can't have more little welfare checks.

Next, do what some states already do and check their homes. If they're driving better cars, watching better televisions, have more gold then Fort Knox, cut them off.

Hell, hire thousands, millions, on unemployment to follow these welfare getters and the second they do drugs, have sex for money, what ever cut them off. We do it to people on disability who aren't disabled. They hire people to record these people at home doing things they say they can't like heavy lifting. Why not for welfare people?



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Being from California Marijuana has always been socially acceptable and with the passing of PROP 215 and law makers in Cali rallying to make it legal state wide its only a matter of time before you can buy it over the counter!!!!!!



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 10:24 AM
link   
It should be a drug and alcohol test. I don't know if there's a way to know HOW MUCH someone drinks, but if they're alcoholics they shouldn't be getting government assistance any more than drug addicts should.

I also don't think smokers should get assistance, but I realize that smoking doesn't affect judgment or anything so there's no point.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by JMasters
When they started requiring SS numbers for Welfare guess what? There was a drop in welfare getters. Why? Because they'd be collecting more then one check under different names.

DRUG TEST! Make them choose between drugs and welfare.

Also, ban the having of welfare checks once they're on. If they're on welfare make them take BC so they can't have more little welfare checks.

Next, do what some states already do and check their homes. If they're driving better cars, watching better televisions, have more gold then Fort Knox, cut them off.

Hell, hire thousands, millions, on unemployment to follow these welfare getters and the second they do drugs, have sex for money, what ever cut them off. We do it to people on disability who aren't disabled. They hire people to record these people at home doing things they say they can't like heavy lifting. Why not for welfare people?


Hell, why stop at welfare recipients, why not cast the net further afield and include anyone who dissents against the ruling ideology, anyone who is gay, or mentally/physically disabled...

This disturbing attitude of lynchmob mentality against the unemployed in general reminds me of a poem:

"When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

Then they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me."

[edit on 28-3-2009 by citizen smith]



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by pmbhuntress

To many folks are taking advantage of the welfare system. Those folks need to be off the welfare and have there kids taken away from them. I believe that drug testing as well as a mandatory drop in every so often would be a good thing.


Ok. What do you think about applying that same logic to ALL parents?

After all, most people who have children are having their children educated on the public dime.

One cent of every federal tax dollar I pay goes to welfare. Which works out to less than $100 a year. But I pay over a 1000 dollars a year in property taxes, much of which goes to education. So lets have all parents drug tested and subjected to drop in visits too if their children receive a public education. In fact, many jobs require psychological testing too. So lets add that to the things parents have to do.

After all, I dont have children. Why should MY tax dollars have to go to pay for other peoples breeding activities? Its not fair.

Do you see the point? You are starting a never ending chain of people who can cry "not fair" and impose on your privacy. Because all of us benefit in some way from tax dollars. Road use, service by the police, fire departments, etc.

And once you let the government have the right to violate the privacy of your "person" without reasonable cause, where does that end? Drug testing? Psychological exams? Drop in visits? Micro chipping? DNA databases?

You guys just arent thinking this through. You are letting your spite get the better of you, and you are trying to make it so your spite gets the better of us all.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by citizen smith
 


They already do it to people on disability, its what gave me the idea. They follow those on disability to see if they are really disabled.

So why not hire the five million plus people on unemployment to follow welfare getters? The second they do drugs, prostitute, what ever, cut them off.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by JMasters
why not hire the five million plus people on unemployment to follow welfare getters? The second they do drugs, prostitute, what ever, cut them off.


There are going to be jobs needed for those forcibly thrown off welfare, perhaps set them up in factories manufacturing brown shirts and jackboots for you and your 'ubermenschen' collegues?

Why not go the whole bloody hog and adopt the slogan of 'Arbeit Macht Frei'



[edit on 28-3-2009 by citizen smith]



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Yes, let's have our own citizens do their dirty work and SPY on each other? I'm done reading this topic. Too much silliness and stupidity. Why can't we accept that not everyone is perfect, and that is what makes this country so great. THE DIVERSITY!!!



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by JMasters

They already do it to people on disability, its what gave me the idea. They follow those on disability to see if they are really disabled.



Yeah but who are "they?"

The "they" who follow you are private investigators hired by insurance companies. Not your government. There is a big difference between the kind of behavior allowed by private individuals and businesses and what the government is allowed to do to its people.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


Heck, they should include drunken-drivers. If found guilty of DUI (drugs or alcohol), you should lose benefits for 3 years the first time. Second time, life! If you are found using drugs, same sentences. If you are found selling, life! Why should we subsidize these low-lives?



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Let me get this right...

If you use/are addicted to marijuana, coc aine, heroin opiates, meth etc

Then you should lose all right to state assistance and be thrown in prison for a long time

But..

If you use/are addicted to any prescribed or over-the-counter drugs such as Coedine painkillers, anti-depressants such Seroxat, Xanax, Fluoexitine, etc

Then its all ok and you can carry on claiming welfare whilst being a legislated dysfunctional addict?



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by JMasters
When they started requiring SS numbers for Welfare guess what? There was a drop in welfare getters.


Well i guess that isn't really being enforced anymore is it, since there are so many illegals collecting welfare benefits .

If you're so worried about your tax dollars going to support people that you feel are undeserving, why don't you focus on the many illegal immigrants that receive assistance, seems to me they are even less deserving.



posted on Mar, 28 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 



Direct your anger and rage at them, not the needy and unfortunate or those who just have a different lifestyle to you.


Man, I don't mean to embarrass, but I love u!

You definitely have it right!!



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join