La Bruzzo wants to drug test welfare recepients...

Originally posted by StigShen

Originally posted by Sagittarian69



Best comparison. And, my answer is no. Even though many students are drug users. Here is why this is different, Students are taking out loans to better themselves and become (hopefully) productive members of society. Welfare recipients are just that. The only indication that they are trying to become productive is when the welfare stops because they got a job. It is the desire to rid ourselves of deadbeats and leeches that I uphold the idea of drug testing them.

Of course, if the cost is higher than just keeping them it will make this debate moot. But, heck, I am enjoying it.

Still new to ATS so this didn't come out the way I wanted lol

edit on 19-3-2011 by Sagittarian69 because: (no reason given)

If using drugs is bad and likely to cause employment problems, then a student should certainly be held just as accountable. It's not just loans, but grants. They don't have to pay the money back. Why should I have to pay for some pot-head to sit in college classes that will never amount to a job because he is a stoner?

Being a little stereotypical aren't you?

Most welfare recipients were productive members of society. who wound up on welfare through no fault of their own.

Where I live most on it are lazy and milk the system while others who really need it are denied.

Originally posted by Hefficide

Originally posted by macman

Making poverty uncomfortable is the best solution.

What makes you think poverty isn't already uncomfortable. No, Sir. It seems to me you wish to make poverty grounds for second class citizenship - outside of Constitutional protections.

~Heff

It must not be to bad. Millions have been in that state for years.
How are they second class?

reply to post by macman


That's quite a bizarre standard for making these assumptions. Should we assume that cancer is a walk in the park based upon the number of people who endure it?

Mandatory drug testing of any segment of our population - especially when income level and economics are the basis for that testing is class elitism at it's most stark and is a violation of basic rights as guaranteed by law. Thus it would create a segment of the population who were treated contrary to our laws and it would make them second class citizens.

The fourth amendment protect us from such things.

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by macman

 

That's quite a bizarre standard for making these assumptions. Should we assume that cancer is a walk in the park based upon the number of people who endure it?

Mandatory drug testing of any segment of our population - especially when income level and economics are the basis for that testing is class elitism at it's most stark and is a violation of basic rights as guaranteed by law. Thus it would create a segment of the population who were treated contrary to our laws and it would make them second class citizens.

The fourth amendment protect us from such things.

Um, cancer is a disease. Poor is a state of mind and broke is an economic state.

It is what ever you spin it as, I guess.
Plain and simple. Welfare is from money from the Govt. The Govt is funded by taxes (Please with-hold the Chinese debt comments). When you suckle the Govt teat, you are beholden to their decisions.
The restrictions may or may not be political tactics. That is not the main point. The point is how can one cry foul when they are getting something for nothing?

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by macman

 

That's quite a bizarre standard for making these assumptions. Should we assume that cancer is a walk in the park based upon the number of people who endure it?

Mandatory drug testing of any segment of our population - especially when income level and economics are the basis for that testing is class elitism at it's most stark and is a violation of basic rights as guaranteed by law. Thus it would create a segment of the population who were treated contrary to our laws and it would make them second class citizens.

The fourth amendment protect us from such things.

Oh, 4th amendment revolves around the courts within criminal proceedings.
I see nothing in there about whether the Govt can or can't require welfare recipients to submit to any request.

Originally posted by macman


No, since 16 I have held at least 1 job, mostly 2. I pay my way through life. I did have CC, but paid them in full. I did not file any chapter, nor did I try to weasel my way out of my debt.
Spare me the cock on bull.

Thanks.
Who's next?

edit on 19-3-2011 by macman because: (no reason given)

I have been working since I was 14, not including lawn-mowing and paper route before that. I started making mortgage payments, utility payments, and filing my taxes independently as an emancipated minor at 16. I went to college and trade school and currently hold several professional licenses. Over several decades of working 2 to 3 jobs at a time, I have amassed a wide variety of work experience from law-enforcement to landscaping to real estate development to restaurateur and all sorts of stuff in between. Nevertheless, I have not been able to secure full time employment since November of 2008. I am not lazy, I am not a junkie. So you tell me. What's wrong with this picture?

Originally posted by mblahnikluver

Originally posted by StigShen

If using drugs is bad and likely to cause employment problems, then a student should certainly be held just as accountable. It's not just loans, but grants. They don't have to pay the money back. Why should I have to pay for some pot-head to sit in college classes that will never amount to a job because he is a stoner?

Being a little stereotypical aren't you?

Most welfare recipients were productive members of society. who wound up on welfare through no fault of their own.

Where I live most on it are lazy and milk the system while others who really need it are denied.

Heh, now look who's stereotyping.

Originally posted by macman

Um, cancer is a disease. Poor is a state of mind and broke is an economic state.

It is what ever you spin it as, I guess.
Plain and simple. Welfare is from money from the Govt. The Govt is funded by taxes (Please with-hold the Chinese debt comments). When you suckle the Govt teat, you are beholden to their decisions.
The restrictions may or may not be political tactics. That is not the main point. The point is how can one cry foul when they are getting something for nothing?

People don't go on welfare by choice. They go on welfare because they have no choice.

Originally posted by StigShen

Originally posted by macman


No, since 16 I have held at least 1 job, mostly 2. I pay my way through life. I did have CC, but paid them in full. I did not file any chapter, nor did I try to weasel my way out of my debt.
Spare me the cock on bull.

Thanks.
Who's next?

edit on 19-3-2011 by macman because: (no reason given)

I have been working since I was 14, not including lawn-mowing and paper route before that. I started making mortgage payments, utility payments, and filing my taxes independently as an emancipated minor at 16. I went to college and trade school and currently hold several professional licenses. Over several decades of working 2 to 3 jobs at a time, I have amassed a wide variety of work experience from law-enforcement to landscaping to real estate development to restaurateur and all sorts of stuff in between. Nevertheless, I have not been able to secure full time employment since November of 2008. I am not lazy, I am not a junkie. So you tell me. What's wrong with this picture?

I don't know. If I knew, I would share it with those in your situation.
Trust in this. I want nothing but the best for ever single person. I want them to succeed in life, do great things and be great people.
I do not live in the fantasy world of believing that all will work towards this. But, the faults and failures of someone else is not my burden to bare.
It sounds like you have as well. I would say bad luck?? Maybe a bad choice early on. Maybe choosing schooling for (Insert trade) was not a good choice. Maybe being a (Insert career) would have been better?
I wish you luck and hope you find a great job as soon as possible.

Originally posted by macman

Oh, 4th amendment revolves around the courts within criminal proceedings.
I see nothing in there about whether the Govt can or can't require welfare recipients to submit to any request.

Well, from now on I think the government should drug test anyone ho wants to vote.

reply to post by StigShen


We all have choices. To think that we don't is silly. If we did not have a choice in this, then why work? WE can all just state "I need money because I have no choice". You have a choice every time you wake up and decide how you are going to fix the problem.

reply to post by macman


Where did your banks get the money from?

Money had to come from somewhere.....

Your country has a 90 TRILLION $ DEBT, got it? Can any of you fathom how much this is? Not even in your life time will you ever be able to pay it back. You are OWNED!

Because only 9% of American is unemployed right now.......where the hell did the rest of the debt come from? 9% of your nation did'nt run up not even close to that debt....

YOU DID, your GOVT did, the very one you elected in to power did, thats right......

I want my nation's money you owe us NOW for all the resources you purchased from my country to keep your machines going.

Now cough up or shut up!

DON'T ever come in here and tell me you pay your own way in life.....there's always someone else out there who is paying for it in advance.

Now how about you start putting in some more productivity, not only to pay my country back but to pay your parents back who wiped your bum for the first 18 years of your miserable life!

reply to post by StigShen


Other then being in direct violation of laws in place protecting voters rights.
And please, I know where you are going with this. I can see your retort before you type it.
15th amendment.

Originally posted by macman

I don't know. If I knew, I would share it with those in your situation.
Trust in this. I want nothing but the best for ever single person. I want them to succeed in life, do great things and be great people.
I do not live in the fantasy world of believing that all will work towards this. But, the faults and failures of someone else is not my burden to bare.
It sounds like you have as well. I would say bad luck?? Maybe a bad choice early on. Maybe choosing schooling for (Insert trade) was not a good choice. Maybe being a (Insert career) would have been better?
I wish you luck and hope you find a great job as soon as possible.

I'm not special dude. There are a lot of people out there like me. On welfare through no fault of their own. I don't manage the economy, I don't dictate the cost of food and gas, I don't set the minimum wage, I don't set corporate policy.

People on welfare are not just the scabs you see bumming cigarettes in front of the 7-11. You would be surprised how many good, hard working, educated, ethical people have been thrown under the bus by our government and the corporations. The next time you walk down a busy street, see if you can point out the one person out of every seven who can't afford to buy supper tonight.

reply to post by bluemirage5


You are so wrapped up in NWO and evil bankers it is really hard to see what you really mean.

Yeah yeah yeah, the USA is in debt. I am not. I did not authorize the US spending bills, nor vote in 99% of the politicians in charge.

That has nothing to do with welfare.

reply to post by StigShen


I think that is the problem. I do not see scabs or helpless people.
I see people who may be down on their luck, or made a bad choice.
They need to pick themselves up and get back at it.
I think you may be blurring the line between welfare and unemployment. For this argument, there is a difference.

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by StigShen

 

We all have choices. To think that we don't is silly. If we did not have a choice in this, then why work? WE can all just state "I need money because I have no choice". You have a choice every time you wake up and decide how you are going to fix the problem.

It was not my choice to get injured in the line of duty. It was not my choice to get laid off. It is not my choice that I haven't gotten a call back from one single job application of the thousands upon thousands that I have sent out.

When I finally went on foodstamps a few months ago, I had three choices. Go on foodstamps, not eat, or steal. That was the choice.

reply to post by StigShen


I will be back tomorrow. Have a good evening.
I do look forward to debating this with you tomorrow, if this thread is still open.

I agree with La Bruzzo,.
good plan

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by StigShen

 

Other then being in direct violation of laws in place protecting voters rights.
And please, I know where you are going with this. I can see your retort before you type it.
15th amendment.

I dont see anything there about drug addicts. If we can deny a felon the right to vote, I say we put a screening booth at every polling place. That should get rid of the undesirables from stinking up the government, right?