It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Florida governor to impose drug testing on welfare recipients...will get rich out of it

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on May, 11 2011 @ 05:18 PM
Well, that's all nice and all. Arguing over the fact if drug tests should be mandatory or not. I understand the issues and I see both sides of the story. All in all, I also see that this governor or whatever is ALSO using the system on a greater scale than one individual who gets pennies compared to what this company will be making... you bicker and complain over petty issues when corporations are a$2 r@ping you and I !! Now how about we actually start discussing the real issue behind the article !!! Please?

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 06:22 PM
reply to post by MilzGatez

Lol People need to stop relying on government. There are too many people that do rely on our government. I for one think the drug testing is a GREAT idea now the way they are doing it seems very suspect but I don't want the money I pay in to buy some one drugs. Help pay there bills yes have no problem with that I'm very fortunate in life I help people when I can gas prices have gotten crazy and when I fill up I pick some one at the gas station and give them $25 worth of gas because I can, and people should help people out when we can but crying cause you might lose benefits cause you use drugs that's part of the big problem with America anyways people are lazy and rewarded for it the so called poor people in a America are rich in other
countries. We act like we are entitled to stuff when were not. We would be better off if we would stop relying on the government to take care of us and learn how to take care of our self. Let's start being responsible today and not relying on our government between the wars, welfare, and Medicare America is going broke.

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 06:50 PM

Originally posted by BioStatistic

Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
reply to post by thehoneycomb

Basically, I think that people on welfare are entitled to everything everyone else has, and that no-one can be their judge.

It is a hard road in this world - some people make it, some don't.

We are not the judge.

Personally I'm tired of supporting them. I say yank the free ride and let them work for it like the rest of us have to. I don't get anything for free, and I have worked for everything I have. I am not in the business of giving it away just because.
I completely agree. Yank tyhe free ride from everyone who takes tax/government money, starting with the hypocritical slime who enact such ridiculous laws.

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:09 PM
reply to post by IsleptIdreamt

People who develop useful and successful business should be rewarded. I don't see why it is corrupt for his wife to benefit - because it is a free market and competitors will benefit too. As long as this is public information, how does it harm anyone?

I will repress my immediate desire to rip into your opening statement tooth and claw by quoting the OP, who posted a link as well as a snippet of the article, so that you may formally educate yourself on Rick Scotts Wifes business.

Rick Scott's Medicaid Overhaul to Benefit…Rick Scott?

Among the companies that stand to benefit from the bill is Solantic, a chain of urgent-care clinics aimed at providing emergency services to walk-in customers. The Florida governor founded Solantic in 2001, only a few years after he resigned as the CEO of hospital giant Columbia/HCA amid a massive Medicare fraud scandal. In January, according to the Palm Beach Post, he transferred his $62 million stake in Solantic to his wife, Ann Scott, a homemaker involved in various charitable organizations.

I will now remind you that it is a conflict of interest for a politician to own or hold a share in, a private institution which may stand to profit by political policy. And finally, I will address your question of corruption by highlighting an interesting tidbit in the snippet above and quoting another post below.

This isn't the first time this law has been passed. The last time it was found unconstitutional and a waste of money and evaporated. The same will happen this time.

Where do you believe the startup funds for Solantic originated? Where do you believe the wasted money will go?

In regards to the mandate;

It’s unconstitutional to mandate what an individual will or won’t do to their body. Welfare issues will not be resolved by drug tests nor will the drug tests dissuade recipients from using drugs. Perhaps instead of ridiculously wasting more money or cutting benefits, we should look to encourage those within our society that are incapable or less than willing to support themselves.

Here’s an idea. To receive welfare one must first complete a vocational assessment and author an annual solution as well as quarterly updates. An individual would be required to match the benefits to earnings within a one year probationary period. Should one succeed in obtaining employment or matched verifiable income, educational opportunities and a de-escalation of benefits would follow over the next 2 years. Should they fail to achieve their annual goal, benefits would cease after 30 days. Or we could just shove a plan in a pipe and smoke it. Light up.

edit on 11-5-2011 by MsAmen because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-5-2011 by MsAmen because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:29 PM
OP is indicative of what is wrong with the US and why this country and others are in the situation they are in......

Condemn capitalism and working class, while upholding the welfare ideology............

Tho I realize that there are legitimate people on the me , I use to work with those people in exactly this capacity........If the US didnt enable this sort of mentality then the people who werent, would be forced to take action and work to eat.......

This progressive mental disorder of entitlement is disgusting

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:41 PM
reply to post by Vitchilo

I think its pretty shady for the gov to use a "personal" business.


If your using MY taxes, I'm not paying those folks to smoke pot or drink beer...period.

Its to HELP folks that are having a hard time and need a hand up.

personally, having kids and parent using dope doesnt mix. If you have kids, stop the drugs. period.

THEY are supposed to be the focus of your life. If your having a "tough" go of it and are stressed, so sorry. I've had my share. Dont run from your issues. Fight through them!

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:45 PM
reply to post by catwhoknowsplusone

The poor need to earn their own money, stop having the government steal my money so the poor can buy drugs. Poor should not get more that 75% of minimum wage, babies should not get $ if their parents are hear illegally, no additional money if the poor have another baby, mandatory disclosure of the father so that the government can collect from him.

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:50 PM
There are two reasons why this program is extremely ridiculous. First, if someone tests positive they are still going to receive the money. I'm not sure of all of the details of the plan, but in the end they are still going to be getting the majority of the money they were getting to start with, as far as I have understood from reading the article.

The second reason this is completely ridiculous, again, if I understood correctly, is because the person implementing it will be receiving most of the profits from the money spent on the tests, since his wife owns the company...Am I right on that one? Because it seems that no one should support this if that is the case.

The thing is, it is obvious that this plan is a conflict of interest, and it is blatantly obvious that the governor has no character, morals, or integrity. If I were charged with making laws, I would implement one that eliminated conflicts of interest among politicians and the bills they create.

In my opinion that is one of the greatest problems with the government today, and it needs to be eliminated. I mean think about it...Is a politician going to vote to help the people if he/she can vote the opposite way and benefit personally? Maybe a handful, but most wouldn't. Maybe that is why none of them speak much about stuff like this, because they know they have been guilty at some point as well.

Things like this really make me sick, what about you guys? Again, my opinion will change if I misread the original article.
edit on 5/11/11 by JiggyPotamus because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:50 PM
Ugh, you people are missing the point. It's about the blatant corruption that is going on in our so called 'government'.

Of course, people are too blind to see the real issue when your 'precious' monopoly money is involved.
edit on 11-5-2011 by anon102 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 08:02 PM
To all the people saying go out and get a job why not move to Florida open a employment agency and make a ton of money getting these people jobs? It's funny to see how easy it is to run scam past the people just by saying people on welfare could be on drugs.

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 08:06 PM
It just goes to show that the same ones that cry injustice are the ones who bargain for injustice.

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 08:21 PM
There are too many reasons why this type of program could be unfair. For example, there are a lot of single parent family situations where the mother is receiving assistance for her and her children. She may have a boyfriend visiting or living with her from time to time that brings drugs into the household. A lot of drug dealers subsidize their habits by dealing small time themselves so not all that dope you smell in the ghetto is government funded. As others who actually work in the Florida welfare assistance agencies have stated the amount of welfare received wouldn't buy much dope.

What the program would do is scare people away from the state services that were afraid they would test positive. Even if you aren't buying dope there is social pressure from boyfriends to partake, at the bar b que before sex etc. etc.

There are a lot of younger kids running track, joining the math and chess clubs etc that hate crack and pot smoke.
Thats why they are so strict about keeping the area within 1000 yards of the schools drug free. Maybe if they took some of that military budget and set up tropical paradise islands off shore somewhere they could segregate the interests without conflict. All the home grown organic weed you could smoke along with organically grown produce and Bohemian artists to entertain. Free ferry service out and back. Not only would they create offshore employment opportunities for that demographic the state might even get some small tax revenue.

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 08:45 PM
It is a socialist agenda. It always has been. I hate using the word socialism because it is a generic word for communism. Socialism and communism are one and the same. Socialism comes from the far left and far right together and it is only called socialism because communism has lost it's value because communism has time and time again proven to be a failure. It is essentially the difference between black and white. both exist but they are not the same in fact they are opposite. But that doesn't mean that both don't go together are invaluable, but it is to say that when you are born you have some inalienable rights and with these inalienable rights you can achieve great success.

Racism is like the wolf in sheep's clothing. To play the race card you are bringing some incoherent values to the table and they will backfire. Your race is your family and you should honor your family whatever race they may be.//////////////////////////

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 09:24 PM
When you elect a business person into a position in the government, don't complain when they act like a business person. There are three types of business persons-

1. See a need and create a service or product to fill that need. Make money.

2. Create a service or product and manufacture the need for it. Make money.

3. Fail at either 1 or 2 and don't make money.

That's it.

If you don't want your government to operate in one of the above ways, don't elect business people. This person was elected to be governor and is acting exactly like he did before. He is making money. Why is this surprising people?

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 11:24 PM
reply to post by byteshertz

Well said. I think the best thing to do that would make everyone happy (lol yea right) would be this: If they have reason to believe that someone receiving welfare benefits is using the money they have to spend on a substantial amount of drugs i.e. visibly burnt out, shaky hands, the normal signs of heavy drug use, then the Government(at cost to themselves, NOT the recipient) can administer a drug test. If found to have been heavily using drugs, then they can be taken off welfare, sent to rehab, whatever. I think that is a pretty good compromise. Then the "sucking on the government teat" BS people can relax. Oh and by the way: Wait til you are in a situation when you are at the store deciding on what you need more, a gallon of milk or a carton of eggs because you can't afford both, before you sit and judge everyone else.

posted on May, 12 2011 @ 12:01 AM
The replies to this thread, by and large, have been absolutely hilarious. They're totally IGNORING the OP's point and going off on the usual rant about welfare recipients on drugs.

Yes, yes, for the millionth time - we get it. Welfare + drugs = bad.

The issue here is that the Governor stands to personally and directly profit from this law requiring testing, through his wife's company, in which he just invested millions. It's utterly corrupt, but as usual, people would rather ignore the white collar corruption and go after the little guy on the bottom of the heap.

posted on May, 12 2011 @ 12:09 AM
reply to post by thehoneycomb

What's so wrong about letting welfare recipients do what they want with the money once we hand it to them? If they need food, let them have food. If they need housing let them obtain housing. If they need drugs to cope or subdue their reality, let them buy whatever they want so they can cope. Someone here said that none of us are in a position to judge one another. That applies to what welfare recipients decide to do for themselves, be it good or bad. What's the difference whether we who are health insured obtain anything we want, vs. welfare recipients taking welfare money and deciding how and where to spend it? Everyone must live with their choices. Let them eat cake if they want cake. Let them buy whatever drugs they chose to if that's what they feel they need to do. It isn't our choice it's theirs to make. Govt should not be in the business of making every spending choice for them or for us.

posted on May, 12 2011 @ 12:29 AM
Although I agree with the testing, I can see something that could possibly develop from this. What happens to the children of parents that test positive? I suspect children and youth services will be called. And their children could possibly be taken away. And also if doing illegal drugs, they are breaking the law. So do they go to jail vs getting welfare?

posted on May, 12 2011 @ 12:45 AM

Originally posted by Elostone
This is awesome, in my opinion
I had to pass a drug test for my job
I am subject to random testing by my employer
I am sick to death of paying taxes to support the gang banging drug dealer on welfare who:
-commits all the heineous crimes in the area
-sleeps all day
-sells drugs to the kids in the community
-keeps his crack whore girlfriend knocked up so they can get more assistance
all on MY tax dollar.

Simple solution: Dont wanna get drug tested? GET OFF WELFARE!

You started your post of rather enlightening and ended up looking rather ignorant. Your reasoning and stereotypical view on the subject is rather disappointing.

Here's a hint, the majority of the people who allow/bring the drugs these "gang bangers" sell wear suits, have private jets, have mansions, and some might have pregnant wives with business set up to launder money. The point is the longer you show anger towards the "gang banger" and not towards the head of the snake (cartels, crooked DEA agents, crooked FBI agents, crooked judges, and last but not least crooked politicians) you do nothing but keep the problem at street level and keep the drugs coming in.

If we want to get control of the issue and weed out the people abusing the system you have to start from the top.


posted on May, 12 2011 @ 12:48 AM
reply to post by Elostone

Taxpayer money is sent to fund a lot of programs other than welfare. Literally there are so many people paying taxes, and there are so many things that taxpayer money is spent on, that chances are that all of your money might not actually be spent on welfare.

Using that logic, rather than having the thought that all of your taxes are spent on charitable causes for programs that are meant to help people, you can instead envision your taxpayer money being spent on military defense instead. That way you can think that your tax money is being spent on that new missile that exploded in some rural middle eastern village and killed many civilians in an instance of collateral damage.

So if it makes you feel any better, just believe that your taxes were spent to kill some foreign children. It might make you feel more at ease.
edit on 12-5-2011 by arbitrarygeneraiist because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in