Michigan's Welfare "Drug Test"

a reply to: wantsome

Yep, seen it all the time when I worked at a store, food stamps for bags of beef jerky, chips and donuts, and then the cash comes out for the beer, tobacco, and lottery. The lottery used to irk me the most, a chance to get rich while the taxpayer picks up the tab for the junk food.

originally posted by: KillerKell

originally posted by: KillerKell

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: KillerKell

"It becomes some ones business when they invest in you. When they are the means of your income. Yes, then it IS their business. That comes with the agreement of taking money from them."

"What's wrong with that?"

Your argument reminds me of a pimp's negotiation. Seriously, we are talking giving up body fluids to complete strangers under duress.

It's like this. When Mommy and Daddy raise you, you get the Roof and the Food... you follow the Rules.

So if you aren't supporting yourself, you take Money from the Government... follow the rules.

You want to do Illegal Drugs? Fine. Don't take Government Money.

What's wrong with that? If you want to take Illegal Drugs... support your self. Pay your own way for your own addiction.

The Welfare is for you to pay your light bill, buy food. Not to buy Illegal Drugs.

What is so difficult to comprehend about that?

Also, I support Tax Payer Money going to Rehabilitation. Absolutely. Job Training. Damn right. That helps my fellow man.

But paying for their Illegal Drugs (which are, by the way, ILLEGAL)... # that. This doesn't better some one in any way.

Do you support tax payer money going to companies that politicians have holdings in? Or their wives? I guess that wellfare is OK?

Conveniently, Rick Scott pushed mandatory drug testing—provided, in part, by his wife’s company, Solantic. Scott transferred his $62 million stake in the company to his wife only a few months before mandating drug testing for state employees and welfare recipients.

a reply to: luthier

Should both not be wrong? Can both not be wrong at the same time?

Are you telling me there isn't another Drug Testing Company that couldn't be hired?

But then, since only $300 of $300,000 has been spent, I don't think Solantic is making much off this... seem to be taking a loss.

So you can be pissed that Rick Scott having Solantic do this, and I can be pissed that Tax Paying Dollars are being spent for Illegal Drugs... and we don't even have to be on opposite sides.

Isn't logic and reason just swell?

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: KillerKell

What is wrong with it, is you have to sign away your civil rights. It is an invasion of privacy and an assumption of guilt before any money is given out or earned.

It violates Civil Rights?

Where in Civil Rights does it say Uncle Sam gives you money? Also, how is it an invasion of Privacy? No one is going into your Home. In fact, the people are going to them.

So yeah... once Uncle Sam starts paying your bills, it changes things.

But no one has answered this yet. Where is it right for Tax Payer Money to be used for the Illegal Purchase of Illegal Drugs for the purpose of Illegal Use? Explain how that is right.

If you can explain how that is right, THEN you have a case for No Drug Testing on Welfare.

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: KillerKell

What is wrong with it, is you have to sign away your civil rights. It is an invasion of privacy and an assumption of guilt before any money is given out or earned.

It violates Civil Rights?

Where in Civil Rights does it say Uncle Sam gives you money? Also, how is it an invasion of Privacy? No one is going into your Home. In fact, the people are going to them.

So yeah... once Uncle Sam starts paying your bills, it changes things.

But no one has answered this yet. Where is it right for Tax Payer Money to be used for the Illegal Purchase of Illegal Drugs for the purpose of Illegal Use? Explain how that is right.

If you can explain how that is right, THEN you have a case for No Drug Testing on Welfare.

a reply to: luthier

Is giving some one a Math Test an example of accusing some one of being incapable of Math? Or is it an opportunity for one to show their capability?


It's not an accusation. You want Welfare Money, and Uncle Sam wants to prove that you aren't some strung out junkie that doesn't benefit Society.


So some could make the case that Drug Testing allows those on Welfare to prove they are benefits to Society. It can Confirm a good thing, like nailing that Math Test.

Of course, in the attempt to show you as an upstanding member of Society, you have the opportunity to show you are worthless and don't benefit Society.

Is it the Math Teacher's fault that you got stoned instead of preparing for the Test?

originally posted by: KillerKell
a reply to: luthier

Is giving some one a Math Test an example of accusing some one of being incapable of Math? Or is it an opportunity for one to show their capability?


It's not an accusation. You want Welfare Money, and Uncle Sam wants to prove that you aren't some strung out junkie that doesn't benefit Society.


So some could make the case that Drug Testing allows those on Welfare to prove they are benefits to Society. It can Confirm a good thing, like nailing that Math Test.

Of course, in the attempt to show you as an upstanding member of Society, you have the opportunity to show you are worthless and don't benefit Society.

Is it the Math Teacher's fault that you got stoned instead of preparing for the Test?

Yeah it's the government's fault that your chances of getting a good math teacher are slim for many of the poor. You know the states where people can't find America on a map.

So blaming the poor or accusing them of drugs is dumb. Or can I test the governor every time he goes to a lunch or dinner on the tax payer dime?

Or is it ok because he got a good education and can do drugs and have a good job.

If the government and law enforcement were not as corrupt as they are in these poor crime areas (Florida having entire precincts laundering drug money for a real example some being caught other not) .

So of coarse the politicians want o blame somebody for the money and tax problems.

Problem is THEY usually are the real problem why there aren't enough jobs or the crime is so bad, or the cops are so corrupt. Mayor's and Govenors. They are usually the biggest problems combined with money power.

originally posted by: KillerKell
Where in Civil Rights does it say Uncle Sam gives you money? Also, how is it an invasion of Privacy? No one is going into your Home. In fact, the people are going to them.

A lot of people get money from the government and not just for welfare. If simply getting government money is the reason why you can subject people to ineffective drug tests I suppose you're fine with doing the same for all government contractors, and having those contractors pay for their tests like you want welfare recipients to do?

Besides that, drug testing simply doesn't work. The first year you drug test you'll get everyone on drugs, but the second year you test those people will all have been screened out so you're testing a bunch of clean people for drug use. It's a program guaranteed to have diminishing returns every year, that even in it's best year contributes nothing to society.

First, who is blaming the poor? Certainly not me. Also, who is accusing them of using Drugs?

But let me explain this to you.

For each "Poor" American spending that money on Drugs... there is a Poor American who can not receive that Aid for their Electricity and Food.

They aren't screwing the rich, they are screwing other poor people.

But go ahead and defend it. That's cool.

So how about using some rationality? Some logic? Reason? Can we attempt some Common Sense?

Then you go on about how it's not the Poor's Fault. Well, those INDIVIDUALS that put Drugs ahead of Electricity, Water, Food and Education... yeah, it IS their fault.

Those that spend the money on Essentials, I SUPPORT.

Those who continue to make bad decisions which further continues the negative cycle their life is in... shouldn't be given a crutch.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: KillerKell
a reply to: luthier

Is giving some one a Math Test an example of accusing some one of being incapable of Math? Or is it an opportunity for one to show their capability?


It's not an accusation. You want Welfare Money, and Uncle Sam wants to prove that you aren't some strung out junkie that doesn't benefit Society.


So some could make the case that Drug Testing allows those on Welfare to prove they are benefits to Society. It can Confirm a good thing, like nailing that Math Test.

Of course, in the attempt to show you as an upstanding member of Society, you have the opportunity to show you are worthless and don't benefit Society.

Is it the Math Teacher's fault that you got stoned instead of preparing for the Test?

First, who is blaming the poor? Certainly not me. Also, who is accusing them of using Drugs?

But let me explain this to you.

For each "Poor" American spending that money on Drugs... there is a Poor American who can not receive that Aid for their Electricity and Food.

They aren't screwing the rich, they are screwing other poor people.

But go ahead and defend it. That's cool.

So how about using some rationality? Some logic? Reason? Can we attempt some Common Sense?

Then you go on about how it's not the Poor's Fault. Well, those INDIVIDUALS that put Drugs ahead of Electricity, Water, Food and Education... yeah, it IS their fault.

Those that spend the money on Essentials, I SUPPORT.

Those who continue to make bad decisions which further continues the negative cycle their life is in... shouldn't be given a crutch.

Yeah it's the government's fault that your chances of getting a good math teacher are slim for many of the poor. You know the states where people can't find America on a map.

So blaming the poor or accusing them of drugs is dumb. Or can I test the governor every time he goes to a lunch or dinner on the tax payer dime?

Or is it ok because he got a good education and can do drugs and have a good job.

If the government and law enforcement were not as corrupt as they are in these poor crime areas (Florida having entire precincts laundering drug money for a real example some being caught other not) .

So of coarse the politicians want o blame somebody for the money and tax problems.

Problem is THEY usually are the real problem why there aren't enough jobs or the crime is so bad, or the cops are so corrupt. Mayor's and Govenors. They are usually the biggest problems combined with money power.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: KillerKell
Where in Civil Rights does it say Uncle Sam gives you money? Also, how is it an invasion of Privacy? No one is going into your Home. In fact, the people are going to them.

A lot of people get money from the government and not just for welfare. If simply getting government money is the reason why you can subject people to ineffective drug tests I suppose you're fine with doing the same for all government contractors, and having those contractors pay for their tests like you want welfare recipients to do?

Besides that, drug testing simply doesn't work. The first year you drug test you'll get everyone on drugs, but the second year you test those people will all have been screened out so you're testing a bunch of clean people for drug use. It's a program guaranteed to have diminishing returns every year, that even in it's best year contributes nothing to society.

No.

Getting Money from the Government IS, however, a reason to be given Effective Drug Tests.

I was a Government Employee, under the DOD, as I was a Soldier. I had to take Drug Tests.

So does pretty much every other Government Employee.

So yeah, if you get Government Money... to include Welfare or Grants... you should be subjected to Drug Tests to assure you are doing the right things with the Government Money. That goes for Politicians as well.

That's the bottom line. If you make your OWN money... do what you want with it. But once you are taking Tax Payers Money... once you are Receiving from the Government... that changes things.

The Postman has to get Drug Tested. The Soldier has to get Drug Tested. As far as Civil Rights people would say "Well, you AGREED to take the Job". Okay, cool... you AGREED to take the Hand Out.

A lot of people tried to Straw Man that I wouldn't say the same of Politicians because they have money, but I feel if you are taking Government Money... you should be tested.

Now, if the Local Church will give you hand outs and not care if you spend it on Drugs... cool. Go to them. That's between you and them. But when it's the Government you are taking the Hand Out from... then you SHOULD be drug tested.

Just like any other Government Employee is.

Because it's the Government that's paying your Bills at that point.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: KillerKell
Where in Civil Rights does it say Uncle Sam gives you money? Also, how is it an invasion of Privacy? No one is going into your Home. In fact, the people are going to them.

A lot of people get money from the government and not just for welfare. If simply getting government money is the reason why you can subject people to ineffective drug tests I suppose you're fine with doing the same for all government contractors, and having those contractors pay for their tests like you want welfare recipients to do?

Besides that, drug testing simply doesn't work. The first year you drug test you'll get everyone on drugs, but the second year you test those people will all have been screened out so you're testing a bunch of clean people for drug use. It's a program guaranteed to have diminishing returns every year, that even in it's best year contributes nothing to society.

No.

Getting Money from the Government IS, however, a reason to be given Effective Drug Tests.

I was a Government Employee, under the DOD, as I was a Soldier. I had to take Drug Tests.

So does pretty much every other Government Employee.

So yeah, if you get Government Money... to include Welfare or Grants... you should be subjected to Drug Tests to assure you are doing the right things with the Government Money. That goes for Politicians as well.

That's the bottom line. If you make your OWN money... do what you want with it. But once you are taking Tax Payers Money... once you are Receiving from the Government... that changes things.

The Postman has to get Drug Tested. The Soldier has to get Drug Tested. As far as Civil Rights people would say "Well, you AGREED to take the Job". Okay, cool... you AGREED to take the Hand Out.

A lot of people tried to Straw Man that I wouldn't say the same of Politicians because they have money, but I feel if you are taking Government Money... you should be tested.

Now, if the Local Church will give you hand outs and not care if you spend it on Drugs... cool. Go to them. That's between you and them. But when it's the Government you are taking the Hand Out from... then you SHOULD be drug tested.

Just like any other Government Employee is.

Because it's the Government that's paying your Bills at that point.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: KillerKell
Where in Civil Rights does it say Uncle Sam gives you money? Also, how is it an invasion of Privacy? No one is going into your Home. In fact, the people are going to them.

A lot of people get money from the government and not just for welfare. If simply getting government money is the reason why you can subject people to ineffective drug tests I suppose you're fine with doing the same for all government contractors, and having those contractors pay for their tests like you want welfare recipients to do?

Besides that, drug testing simply doesn't work. The first year you drug test you'll get everyone on drugs, but the second year you test those people will all have been screened out so you're testing a bunch of clean people for drug use. It's a program guaranteed to have diminishing returns every year, that even in it's best year contributes nothing to society.

Where did I say I wanted the Welfare Recipient to pay for the Drug Test?

I didn't pay for the Drug Test as a Soldier. No Federal Employee does. So why should the Welfare Recipient?

It's really easy to attack my points when you invent them yourself, instead of arguing against what I actually say.

Also, Government Contractors do have to take Drug Tests. It's part of the vetting process to win the Bid.

So again, if you take Money from the Government... pee in the damn cup. At no additional cost to yourself.

The Postman has to. The Soldier has to. The Cop has to. But it's to much to ask the Welfare Recipient and the Politician to do the same?

a reply to: KillerKell

No one I know buys drugs with their food stamps. If they did, I would turn them in because it is illegal.

You have been conditioned well by the government. Giving up body fluids is personal and invasive for something you don't have in hand, job or welfare.

a reply to: KillerKell

Actually, in the states that have done it so far they make the person pay for it, and then if they pass the state reimburses them. The average federal employee also takes a drug test once when they get hired not on a recurring basis (though the military sometimes does random tests).

Here's the question you need to ask though. If a person fails their drug test what are you going to do? Cut off their benefits? What if they have dependents, do you just throw a bunch of children into the foster care system? People haven't typically come out of that well adjusted. Do you condemn the drug user to no income, which inevitably means more crime and eventually jail? It costs more to house a person in jail than they were getting in welfare. So now, not only are we paying more to house them, we're paying more to house their kids, they all get even more screwed up, and we create more criminal activity. How is that a good outcome?