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: 8
33
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by citizen smith
 


If you are receiving tax-payer funded assistance, then you shouldn't be smoking weed or doing any illegal drugs or over-doing it on alcohol and cigarettes. But, doing so will not result in a loss of your tax-payer funded assistance.....now.

Welfare is not a lifestyle, should not be treated like one, and should be used as a stop-gap measure to get people back on their feet.

If you hold a job where drug testing is required (which is most jobs in the US in most sectors today), then you shouldn't be smoking, snorting, or shooting anything illegal. Doing so and getting caught will result in the loss of your job.

You don't lose your assistance, but you will lose your job. What is not right about that statement??




posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Easy question........ why not? There are those that really need welfare to survive. Then there are those that abuse the system(tax dollars) and what are they contributing to their families? THAT is what welfare is. If they aren't doing drugs why wouldn't they submit to a drug test? If you are doing drugs you not only shouldn't be getting welfare you shouldn't be raising children.


Tell ya what, why not extend the powers of the DSS too rummage through your bins too...after all, if you consume more units of alcohol than is medically safe you're also a risk to the stae, the community, kids....etal

It seems this kind of arguement is coming from those who have little or no experience of life on the 'other side of the fence'



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
There shouldn't be ANY testing for drugs unless it applies to everyone in ANY profession or recipients of welfare.

What about people that have already worked and payed taxes that are under hard times? They contributed just like everyone else. Same goes for unemployment benefits, not sure how it works in the States, but in Canada we pay a healthy sum off of each cheque for those benefits, it's OUR money.

Are you so naive that you can't see this is designed to deny benefits and save money because of the state of the economy? It has nothing to do with being "concerned" about people. Do you think it will be better when these people don't have ANY income and start committing crimes to get some? Then what? Throw them in prison and cost twice as much to take care of them? Or will they have to be drug tested to qualify for prison?

I don't condone marijuana use, but let's face it, it's my countries biggest cash crop and a large % of the population uses it. Same with the States. What if they aren't buying it? Only growing it for their own consumption? No money used...

Your government is playing games for money. Period.

[edit on 26-3-2009 by B.A.C.]



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by citizen smith
Tell ya what, why not extend the powers of the DSS too rummage through your bins too...after all, if you consume more units of alcohol than is medically safe you're also a risk to the stae, the community, kids....etal


Exactly. Welfare's purpose is to allow someone in difficulty to raise their children, not get high or drunk.


It seems this kind of arguement is coming from those who have little or no experience of life on the 'other side of the fence'


Oh, I lived on that side of the fence. I lived in one of the most repressed part of Canada. Don't presume.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by citizen smith
 


If you are receiving tax-payer funded assistance, then you shouldn't be smoking weed or doing any illegal drugs or over-doing it on alcohol and cigarettes


Just because your economically hurting, doesn't mean that everyone in reciept of your tax dollars should go through the same



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Finally!!!! I really hope they do this in CA, it would probably get rid of half the people on welfare..



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by SilentBob86

Originally posted by Bombeni

Originally posted by andy1033
If you are on welfare, how would you afford illegal drugs?

Just how many people that get welfare, can buy that stuff when they need food, and other things.

Can there really be that big of a problem of welfare people on drugs.


Lots of people trade their foodstamps for money or drugs. When my kids were little, the worst period of our lives was a 6 month least at The Outrigger apts. in Tulsa, OK. I couldn't count the times mostly mothers of small kids would approach me in the parking lot to buy their stamps at half price. Seriously at least once every other day.


That would be a sound argument if the majority of people actually recieved paper foodstamps. Most states now use EBT cards, which you cant exactly trade for cash.....



Well this was 20 years ago when they were paper booklets. They've found a way I am sure to do the same with the debit cards. I think there are probably certain stores, in fact I am sure of it, that don't check for id, they don't care who the card belongs to they just want to sell groceries. Not all stores of course but there are crooked stores.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by aLiiEn
 


I dont think you fully understand that welfare is a privilege not a right. Anytime you have privileges there are going to be conditions, and this is a fair condition.

You have done a lot to speculate about the posters here, calling them names, calling them uneducated and more. I would venture to say that maybe you are on welfare and wouldnt like to see this pass? I could be wrong, i probably am.

But what i do know is that ive read your threats on other boards, and you are a new member and spend most of your time attacking and berating other members on other boards.....

Please if you are going to argue points with people keep it civil , you dont have to call names to get your ideas across.....

And if you are going to sit here and call everyone uneducated, maybe you should take some lessons on proper sentence structure of some sort, and perhaps learn to spell, after all if im going to be insulted on my intellect id rather it be from someone who can administer the insult CORRECTLY.

The OP is right , I dont want my tax dollars going to someone so they can spend money on drugs or anything else, and if your an addict with kids, you shouldnt have your kids sorry, but thats the way it should be. If that makes me an elitist jerk then so be it.

If its about the kids then make it about the kids, drugs have no value in that equation.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

It seems this kind of arguement is coming from those who have little or no experience of life on the 'other side of the fence'


Oh, I lived on that side of the fence. I lived in one of the most repressed part of Canada. Don't presume.


No, what I meant is that those who rode high on the hog during times of the boom are now in economic stress, and its a reverse of the entitlement mentality that drove the credit surge...back in the good ol' days it was "I want.." and now the mentality has shifted to "You can't have.."




[edit on 26-3-2009 by citizen smith]



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
So far the only ones saying this is a bad thing... DO DRUGS! Not exactly a source we should take seriously. You do drugs, you don't deserve MY money. I'm not spending my money on drugs so why should you spend my money on drugs?



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   
I think everyone can put there minds to rest; I doubt seriously the welfare office could take on drug testing, too much red tape, they are overburdend as it is with the highest number of people ever on stamps.

Besides it would put most of them out of a job because the majority would test positive.

[edit on 26-3-2009 by Bombeni]



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by JMasters
 


same arguement applies to 'drugs' as applies to alcohol...use responsibly, know your limits, and never ever drive or take on a task that demands unimapaired performance



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bombeni

Originally posted by SilentBob86

Originally posted by Bombeni

Originally posted by andy1033
If you are on welfare, how would you afford illegal drugs?

Just how many people that get welfare, can buy that stuff when they need food, and other things.

Can there really be that big of a problem of welfare people on drugs.


Lots of people trade their foodstamps for money or drugs. When my kids were little, the worst period of our lives was a 6 month least at The Outrigger apts. in Tulsa, OK. I couldn't count the times mostly mothers of small kids would approach me in the parking lot to buy their stamps at half price. Seriously at least once every other day.


That would be a sound argument if the majority of people actually recieved paper foodstamps. Most states now use EBT cards, which you cant exactly trade for cash.....



Well this was 20 years ago when they were paper booklets. They've found a way I am sure to do the same with the debit cards. I think there are probably certain stores, in fact I am sure of it, that don't check for id, they don't care who the card belongs to they just want to sell groceries. Not all stores of course but there are crooked stores.


Great point Gizmo. In my state the food stamp benefit is on a card mailed to the recipient. All the recipient needs to do is pass off the card to someone else. Done.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic1


I like this idea.



Intrusions of privacy?




Many jobs in this country require random drug testing, so why not welfare and state assistance recipients?



Because it's unconstitutional... not for business, but for gov.




People from all walks of life receive government assistance, so they can't say it is profiling or racist or prejudiced.



There's a reason to enact a law... because it's not racist.




It does send the message (hopefully) that if you are a drug addict or test positive for drugs when you are assisted by the government and the tax payers, you might not have that assistance for much longer.



Unfortunately it would still allow for people who use coc aine, alcohol, tobacco and a range of other illegal drugs to circumvent the system...

So it would be grossly imbalanced.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by JMasters
So far the only ones saying this is a bad thing... DO DRUGS! Not exactly a source we should take seriously. You do drugs, you don't deserve MY money. I'm not spending my money on drugs so why should you spend my money on drugs?


Problem is that time's after drug use in which it can be detected in your system varies greatly...

Are we also talking about alcohol? Tobacco? Caffeine?

Oh wait... you want the people taking your money on Caffeine don't you...

Anyone recall how the Spaniards denied the local indigenous people the ability to chew the coca leaf? This worked out well until they realized nobody was working anymore. So the Catholic Church made a dispensation for this...







[edit on 26-3-2009 by HunkaHunka]



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Marmota monax
 


Untold hundreds of thousands of dollars of food stamps are traded out for something else. I sure know a lot about food stamps don't I? lol

My nephew, who died of a drug overdose two years ago, God rest his soul, had me take him to a specific grocery store once in a low income part of town, to buy groceries. He had a food stamp card--not his--and went right thru with his purchase was not asked for any identification. So yeah welfare is trying to crack down on this obviously.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   
I agree with this for welfare but not all forms of assistance. For instance some disabled people that get assistance from the government paid into that assistance from their pay checks (through taxes). The government should not deny giving them that assistance when it is needed, I don't care if they are caught doing something illegal, they already paid for that assistance.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


I hate it when people bark out that things are unconstitutional. Learn what is and what isnt first

Welfare is a privilege not a right. With any service those who enact it can set down rules and regulations. If you dont want to abide by those rules and regulations then dont sign the paper. It has nothing to do with constitutionality and everything to do with choices that YOU make, if you cant stay clean, DONT get on the program.

Alcohol and tobacco arent the greatest things in the world, in fact a lot would argue that alcohol is worse and in a lot of ways it is. So I would say if the person has a history of alcohol abuse or related crimes, then that would constitute testing as well, after all abuse is abuse.

Smokes on the other hand, come on , now you are just throwing out random stuff to try and inflate your point. Caffeine and Cigs arent really going to make a person unfit to work, or unable to hold a job.

As for your argument about other drugs getting through, sure some drugs you CANT test for, GHB for one, and others have a shorter half life.
There are ways to test for drugs other than a pee test tho, such as hair samples. Random testing also adds the threat of getting caught.

This is not an invasion of privacy, when you sign up for something (like ive said before) there are stipulations, if you dont like it then dont sign up for it.

You can argue then that it excludes people who need welfare because of they have to conform to a set of rules. Well, guess what, if you really need welfare and you arent going to abuse it, them taking a hair sample or pee test every so often isnt going to bother you at all.......again, thats assuming that you arent addicted to drugs, or planning on abusing the system.



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by citizen smith

Originally posted by skeptic1
reply to post by citizen smith
 


If you are receiving tax-payer funded assistance, then you shouldn't be smoking weed or doing any illegal drugs or over-doing it on alcohol and cigarettes


Just because your economically hurting, doesn't mean that everyone in reciept of your tax dollars should go through the same


Care to elaborate on that pearl of wisdom??

Because it makes zero sense to me.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join