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.

 

La Bruzzo wants to drug test welfare recepients...

page: 16
44
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   
This is a no brainer. It ought to be a requirement for everyone so that no one can squeal "discrimination". A percentage should be deducted for treatment and 3 strikes, they're SOL, period. No bennies for them (no pun intended)
Whatever happened to "Tough Love" anyway?




posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Sorry, This is a horrible idea. Where does it stop?

I will never agree to let the Government get the camels nose in that tent.

I feel your pain. I pay lots of taxes. This is not the answer. What's next?

A "DT" for a home loan? A car loan? These tests can have many false positives.

The answer is jobs. Not an unconstitutional and humiliating illegal search.

Besides, this will not stop anyone. It will also probably increase crime.

Just my opinion....Not one more single solitary right should be taken from anyone.

Let the bashing begin...



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by larrydavid

Originally posted by HaveAnotherOne
reply to post by Kryties
 


Given your previous thoughts, your opinions mean as much as your life does.

Nothing. Zero. Zilch. "�"

There are literally countless freelance opportunities for someone who knows php/mysql

Freelance Jobs #1

Freelance jobs #2

Freelance gigs #3


I am done talking with you. You have really exposed what type of person you are.

I was taught to "never cast my pearls before swine".


As long as you got yours, thats all that matters right? To hell with everyone else?
edit on 18-3-2011 by larrydavid because: (no reason given)






I think yo missed the posters point completely.....he was suggesting the available job market within the computer industry. Does viable evidence upset you?



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by larrydavid
 


I earned mine. People are more than free to earn their own. I, nor anyone else, have an obligation to subsidize the lives of others. I don't want to pay for yours, and I don't want you to pay for mine.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by HaveAnotherOne
 


By the way FDRs second bill of rights would have made housing a right. People work 50 hours a week at times and still can not afford housing. My answer to fix things is simple utilize Maslow's hierarchy of needs as a general guideline on what people need then enact FDRs second bill of rights. Secondly all housing would be based on income regardless. The people who make money would offset those who make less.
Just because someone makes $7.25 an hour does not make them less valueable then someone who makes $30 an hour. Who would serve you your McDonalds hamburger or mow your grass? Come on we need the service jobs!



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


Apartment owners have no obligation to lower their revenue so the "poor" can have an apartment. Market forces dictate you charge the most people are willing to pay in order to keep your building full. The moment rental occupancy drops, you lower your prices in order to fill said apartments.

Going lower than necessary costs the owner money.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by DogsDogsDogs
 


so then that means everyone including you. We all depend on something so let's make it manadtory of all those who need a job, the congress,the government,all those in college.
What a heavy burden that would be on the tax payer. I think it would just be easier to only test a few who have a history of drug use.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by dreamseeker
reply to post by HaveAnotherOne
 


By the way FDRs second bill of rights would have made housing a right. People work 50 hours a week at times and still can not afford housing. My answer to fix things is simple utilize Maslow's hierarchy of needs as a general guideline on what people need then enact FDRs second bill of rights. Secondly all housing would be based on income regardless. The people who make money would offset those who make less.
Just because someone makes $7.25 an hour does not make them less valueable then someone who makes $30 an hour. Who would serve you your McDonalds hamburger or mow your grass? Come on we need the service jobs!


FDR was a Constitution raping redistributive pig.

It's a travesty that the country had to suffer through the experience that was FDR at all.

Housing is not a right, it is a luxury, as it rightly should be.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 





By the way FDRs second bill of rights would have made housing a right


Which further proves that you are for socializing, and nationalizing all reality? So with your logic, the brain surgeon who went to school the better part of his life, should have the same living arrangements as the minimum wage worker at Taco Bell. Wheres the pride in that..knowing you just saved a person life, but live next door to a Taco bell server? There would be no reason to apply ones self to succeed. Wheres your logic again?



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by forall2see
 


Are you hiring? I have been on foodstamps for several months now. I have a college education, professional licenses, and trade school. I had an unblemished work record for more than two decades. A few years ago I was laid off from my last full-time job after I broke my arm in the line of duty. I have not been able to secure a full-time job since, despite putting out more than 3,000 applications in various fields.

I am not picky, work is work. I have packed groceries before, I would do it again. The pay is terrible, but the job isn't half bad really. Same goes for mopping floors. I don't ride around on some high horse thinking some job is "below" me. I have done all sorts of work since I am not as judgmental as you appear to be.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by HaveAnotherOne
 


Then incomes have to raise! So what is your solution again? You keep dodging my question. You have no arguement if you cant come up with a better solution like I did!



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


No is any better than anyone else. We are all equal. What was your solution? You sure can complain but so far I have asked this over three times yet you are silent.. Still waiting.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


Are you going to force a business owner to increase wages, though profits could be down? How does that work in business ownership?



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by dreamseeker
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


No is any better than anyone else. We are all equal. What was your solution? You sure can complain but so far I have asked this over three times yet you are silent.. Still waiting.



Re-read page 15 at the very bottom...you might learn something.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by HaveAnotherOne
 


You're not paying for welfare. You're paying the interest on the national debt.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


Lol you didn't come up with a solution. You came up with a scenario in fantasyland.

The solution is to remove the governmental influence from the economy. Business taxes, capital gains, etc etc need to be eliminated. Money needs to be put back into the market in order to encourage growth, not redistribution.


Spending MUST be cut drastically. Painful cuts, such as entitlements, welfare (both corporate and individual), the wars must be ended, and a return to the principles set forth in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution would be a damn good place to start.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


Are you going to force a business owner to increase wages, though profits could be down? How does that work in business ownership?


If you can't afford to pay your workers a wage they can live on, then you can't afford to be in business.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
None of you have explained to me How 14 MILLION AMERICANS are supposed to get 300,000 JOBS.
edit on 18-3-2011 by larrydavid because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by StigShen
 


Very good, and point exactly. The other poster doesn't understand basic economics.



posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by StigShen
 


This is what I am talking about. This person here sounds like a geniuely good person but has fallen upon hard times. It can happen to anybody. Is anyone any better than this person here? NO! Bless you for sharing your experience. I don't see why someone like this should have to be subjected to drug testing if he is willing to try.
I bet he would do the drug testing if he had to but still...
What about a brian surgeron or a pilor? I would be more concerened about them being on drugs than anyone on welfare!



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join