It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ventian
reply to post by DogsDogsDogs
I agree to an extent with the addicts part. I actually sympathize with them sometimes on the overcoming part and how hard it is (I smoke cigarettes), but at the same time, they have to have some sort of sobriety every once in awhile to notice what they are doing. Drug dealers on the other hand, (crack, meth, coc aine types especially) disgust me to no end.
Pot meet kettle
Originally posted by Blanca Rose
Originally posted by ventian
First step in reform is drug testing. I work, and pay taxes that they live on. I also submit to random drug tests to keep on doing the first two. They should have to submit to random screenings as well. If they fail, take away their kids and program benefits. Then tie them off where they can't breed anymore.
Here is the problem with your "idea," or rant as I see it.
So, are you going to pay for all of this drug testing? Being that people who are in a financial crisis enough to be on food stamps are not going to. Can you imagine the cost to tax payers for this drug testing?
Are you willing to have tax payers be responsible for sterilizations proceedures, given the cost?
Yes, the program needs an overhaul, but your ideas would cost us more!
reply to post by ventian
What does a pack of cigarettes cost a smoker, the smoker's family, and society? This longitudinal study on the private and social costs of smoking calculates that the cost of smoking to a 24-year-old woman smoker is $86,000 over a lifetime; for a 24-year-old male smoker the cost is $183,000. The total social cost of smoking over a lifetime—including both private costs to the smoker and costs imposed on others (including second-hand smoke and costs of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security)—comes to $106,000 for a woman and $220,00 for a man. The cost per pack over a lifetime of smoking: almost $40.00. The first study to quantify the cost of smoking in this way, or in such depth, this accessible book not only adds a weapon to the arsenal of antismoking messages but also provides a framework for assessment that can be applied to other health behaviors. The findings on the effects of smoking on Medicare and Medicaid will be surprising and perhaps controversial, for the authors estimate the costs to be much lower than the damage awards being paid to 46 states as a result of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement.
Social costs of smoking are triple those of illicit drugs
Christopher Zinn Sydney
The financial impact of tobacco and alcohol far outweigh the impact of illicit drugs, with smoking costing the community almost three times as much as any other category of drug, according to a study on the social costs of drug use in Australia.
The report, produced for the federal government’s national drug strategy, estimates that tobacco accounted for 61.2% of the costs to society of drugs, or $A21bn (£7.6bn; $12.4bn; €11.5bn). For the first time the cost calculations included an estimate of the impact of passive smoking and newly available data to assess the effect on the Australian population of absenteeism, drugs, ambulances, fires, crime, and even litter.
Alcohol accounted for 22% of total costs ($A7.5bn) and illegal drugs for 17% ($A6.0bn). The calculations for the survey period, 1998-9, included both tangible and intangible costs to individuals, companies, and governments.
State can no longer afford costly, deadly addiction to tobacco
To the citizen's of Woonsocket:
There is a silent killer living among us. This killer doesn't live in a cave across the world or on a battlefield but on every street corner ready to strike its prey - you. This killer doesn't strike alone but in packs and goes by many names like Camel, Marlboro, and Newport. Cigarettes remain the culprits behind the number one cause of preventable death in the world. The latest death records for Woonsocket indicate that 914 deaths are caused by tobacco annually. And, it's likely 532 additional deaths are linked to tobacco. This is an average of 30 deaths a week!
Despite being widely known for life threatening effects, people still smoke. But it's not just anyone. Data from community surveillance in Rhode Island has found tobacco advertising and prevalence for smoking higher in low-income minority communities.
The community survey also suggests that advertising is one of the strongest ways of driving people and youth to smoke. In addition, low-income neighborhoods may also experience greater levels of poverty and racism due to social and cultural factors, which in turn influences their tobacco use.
Woonsocket's youth smoking rate is 18.7 percent, which is higher than the state average. As mentioned earlier, tobacco advertising may be linked to kids experimenting with smoking and becoming hooked to tobacco. Tobacco ads entice youth with colorful displays, beautiful "healthy" people, and cigarettes that come in fruity flavors. Easy access through illegal sales also contributes to youth smoking.
Besides losing irreplaceable lives we lose money treating illnesses caused by tobacco, many of which are difficult to overcome and costly to treat. According to the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, the average R.I. household spends $727 on health care costs brought on by tobacco use.
Now more than ever we cannot afford deadly and costly addictions like tobacco. It's time to put cigarettes on an island far away where no one will ever become another victim of a tobacco illness or death.
Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Rather than "punish" welfare recipients for having kids, why not just reward them for being clean or having birth control implants. I hate to sound arrogant or generalize, but the welfare population is quite impulsive when it comes to money. Many of them would not give much thought to taking a sum of money to get a birth control implant or a vasectomy.
The harder sell would be a clean drug test program. Under such a program, the participants would have to subject themselves to random unannounced drug tests for a period of time like one year. If the participants do not fail any drug tests after the period of time, they will get a sum of money.
The drug program is a hard sell because impulsive people will give into the immediate gratification a dose of drugs can offer, rather than the long term award participation in the program can offer. I hate to sound rotten, but I would suspect that many of those people that would take the money for sterilization or a vasectomy will turn around and spend the money on something frivolous.