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.


Bills Would Require Michiganders To Work For Welfare, Pass Drug Test

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 10:49 AM
reply to post by Krazysh0t

Oh but business is becoming the new government if you haven't noticed.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:05 AM

While they are out doing community service, they will also possibly learning a new trade, networking and meeting new contacts. Doing this will also help to patch up resumes blank spots in the prospective employees work history.

I very much doubt this. Have you ever done court ordered community service? They find stupid busy-work for you to do. Picking up trash on the side of the road -- that sort of thing. Some of the guys who run the program even use the workers to do favors for their friends and connections. I did some work at a (private) sportsman's club, because the guy running the crew was a member there and owed them a favor or some crap like that...

But in all the time, never did I learn a new skill, nor did I meet anyone worth networking with.

And while this may sound like a good idea on the surface (sure, I've heard worse) my support for this program, or lack thereof, would be dependent on the particulars. How many hours will they have to work per week, for how much money? If they're going to make it like work, they have to compensate at least equal to minimum wage. I'll not stand for any sneaky bill as a means to state-supported slave labor.

Plus, while some people may abuse the system, not everyone does. Part of the point of welfare is to give you a little assistance to stay on your feet until you can get a job. Part of that, of course, requires actually getting another job. Which means looking for one. Which means if this program were to require people to do stupid busy-work from 9 to 5, that would leave little to no time for the person to go out and look for a real job-- increasing the likelihood that they would have to stay on welfare.

I am flatly, 100% opposed to the drug testing portion. This proved pointless in another state, for one. Second, it's discriminatory. But that's a whole other (longish) post.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:22 AM
reply to post by TDawgRex

Good! Those who are able to work need to. And like many actual workplaces, they need to take drug tests. Is it too wrong to ask people to be responsible? I know many people who are on social welfare are so due to either really not finding a job (not surprising in this economy) or people who is on social welfare to a stepping stone to somewhere else, like disability. Of course, I would never ask a sick person who is unfit to work, work. Unless that is, if he or she can do something. If you have trouble walking, a desk job somewhere would be a good alternative.

But far too many people (I unfortunately know a couple) view welfare as a better alternative to working. Mainly because they're lazy slobs who feel that if they can get it for free, why not? I'd love to see them get a rude awakening with a work order in the mail stating "work it or lose it"!

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:24 AM
You've got to love the misdirection on this (not).

The REAL problem is the amount of money going to those who already have all the money and since there's no chance in hell of changing that, they do the polar opposite - attack those with nothing. Great way to get folks to look the other way there Rockefeller..

"What?? People are pissed that we're getting huge bonuses while our workers can barely put dinner on the table? QUICK! Start feeding some stories to the media and crafting some bills about how the Poor are STEALING from everyone and taking advantage of the system.."

Talk about spinelessness.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:25 AM
and I'm not defending these welfare-slackers btw. I think they're pieces of # but I truly believe the problem lies elsewhere and actions like this simply play on kneejerk reactions

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:38 AM

reply to post by the owlbear


It would be good if we could get unemployment back to the Bush peak ...

4.4% was great wasn't it ?
Look what happened when Democrats took control of Congress starting in Jan 2007 !!!

Looks like the deficit spending was better back then too eh ?

Bureau of Labor statistics said unemployment was only 4.4%??? I can make up numbers, graphs, and pie charts as well. Does it make it REALITY? Unemployment was NOT 4.4 % even during the CLINTON YEARS. Let me go ask my pet unicorn about those figures.

And you dodged the whole corporate welfare and tax relief for "job creation". Since the tax rates have remained UNCHANGED AND CORPORATIONS WERE GIVEN EVEN LARGER TAX BREAKS...wouldn't it be by pure reason alone, there should be over 100% employment since, after all, it was only 4.4%...more money "for jobs"+more time COLLECTING that money should mean more jobs...your graph demonstrates the reverse.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:39 AM
Basically, it sounds like they're saying welfare dollars should only be spent on taxable items.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:45 AM
I hope everyone is aware that welfare accounts for about 1/1,000 of our national debt. In other words, cracking down on welfare won't do crap to help our economy. It will just piss off a lot of people who need that welfare to scrape by.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:48 AM
reply to post by onequestion

This would be true if the government was giving away FREE guns. They are not.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:52 AM
reply to post by TDawgRex

As much as I agree with you there are 2 reasons why this cant work.

1. Drug tests are way too easy to beat.
2. The con artists will hurt themselves on purpose and sue.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 11:54 AM
reply to post by Auricom

You must have missed my posts on the front page that said that drug tests for welfare recipients is a huge waste of money. By the way businesses shouldn't require them either. If I show up to work on time, not high or drunk, am productive while at work, and get my work down on time, who is a business to tell me I cannot put a foreign substance into my body?

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 12:03 PM

The people on Welfare were required to work at the counties and other government funded programs in the early eighties. I had some of them on the Insulating crew that I was a foreman of back then.

So you are saying that YOU received FREE labour paid for by the Taxpayer!

And Who is the WELFARE QUEEN???

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 12:21 PM
I'm from Michigan I live 2 blocks north of Detroit. Our area has been decimated by job losses. There are whole industrial complexes that have been abandoned. I'm not talking about the blight from the inner city I'm talking about areas that were full of business's before 2003. I literally watched the jobs disappear and I worked for several companies as they were closing. There are buildings everywhere for sale that have been foreclosed on. These were full time middle class jobs that gave people an opportunity to make a living wage without the need for collage.

My grandparents came from the south after WW2 to work in these factories. They retired in the early 90's with full pensions and through back breaking work they reaped the rewards for it.

And now the government wants to wage war on the poor. For what? so they can lower the official numbers of people on welfare to make themselves look better?

There are always going to be those that abuse the system but the majority of people I see at the welfare office aren't' welfare queens. Even if the majority of people did abuse the system I'd say good for them. Why should we give a rats ass about a system that through us overboard by selling us out in the first place? The rich are the ones that systematically destroyed the middle class in the first place. They're the ones that gave our jobs to the Chinese so they can increase their bottom line. Let them pay the welfare doles!

edit on 19-9-2013 by wantsome because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 12:34 PM
reply to post by TDawgRex

I fully agree.
Why should we be paying these people welfare/unemployment 'and' shipping jobs overseas?
Tell me why we can pay someone in India to staff a call center/ sew a tee-shirt/make a lamp when we have unemployed people here that can do the same thing?

I think the people who receive welfare would be happy for the chance to hold their head up and have a respectable answer when someone asks them "what do you do?" they can answer I make.....

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 12:45 PM
besides welfare recipients having to perform community service , so should the politicians . there is nothing like going for some groceries and seeing some people with a cart filled to the brim with name brand junk food all while wearing a tracking bracelet on their leg . as much as i dislike most politicians and people in suits , life long welfare cheats irk me to no end . while it is true that the bankers and government regulations killed jobs , i do not feel the least bit sorry for people who do not try to find some sort of gainful employment or feed themselves . not to mention , after observing the way that alot of these people behave and talk , i cant hold a grudge for someone not hiring them . if people with jobs are volunteering to pick up trash on the side of the road , there is no reason recipients not to.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 01:09 PM
reply to post by BritofTexas

I was a foreman for the Agency, I was paid with money from state and federal funding...????...Yes, I was paid by the government to work, I was an employee of the people. I was a burden on the taxpayer, just like the governors, Senators, president, and anyone else that gets paid from any government agency in the USA. If you want to look at welfare, look at all the recipients, including the big military contractors. Including the construction workers that get paid with government funding. People do not realize that we have been reducing government workers but increasing the spending to contractors, the same, if not more money is being spent.

Just because a contractor does the work does not mean the taxpayer money was not wasted. I see more work being done now with government money that doesn't really need to be done than I ever did.

Most of the wood that was cut on the job I was talking to benefitted the elderly, people who worked most of their life and paid their share of taxes. Because their wages were lower in the past, their social security was low. People who were paid well and retired twenty years ago have low social security today, usually the minimum.
edit on 19-9-2013 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 01:18 PM
The problem with people being forced to work for welfare is nobody wants someone coming into their line of work and doing as good a job for's ok as long as it's not in my workplace.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 01:44 PM
The only issue I take with the work requirement is the hardship it would cause for single parents who must then find (and pay for?) child care... not especially practical.

But the drug testing is wrong on so many levels that I can never support it. First and foremost, it violates both our rights to be secure in our person (no unreasonable search and seizures), and our right not to be forced to provide evidence against ourselves. It's a deal breaker. And, of course, it simply gives government more intrusive power over our lives.

Beyond that, as others have noted, it's a waste of time and money that only benefits those getting paid to give the tests; false positives will further burden people who are already struggling; legal substances such as hemp oil and poppy seeds -- as well as medical marijuana -- will produce technically accurate positives, but they will be punished nevertheless...

I would much rather see these folks required to learn a marketable skill, and give them the training and other resources necessary to do so, thus removing them from the welfare rolls and creating responsible, productive, contributing members of society. There will always be lazy moochers, but I have no doubt most people receiving assistance would much rather have the skills, the resources, and the opportunity to provide for themselves.

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 01:44 PM
Lets drug test the wealthy scum bags who took our bailout money (welfare) and have them do volunteer work. They've stole more money than ALL the welfare recipients combined, and they do nothing to earn it.

Lets focus on the bigger problem here. Instead of stepping all over the poor, most of whom are trying to survive and do right.

edit on 19-9-2013 by Visitor2012 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 02:11 PM

reply to post by Krazysh0t

This is a deeper infringement on civil liberties.

If you believe in this give me a break, whats the difference between this and background checks on guns? Non they are all infringements on civil liberties. Its non of their business what i do in my free time as long as i am not hurting anyone, period.

I think that's the whole thing, right there. It is a growing and non-stop move to eat up every sense of privacy, every sense of independence from Uncle and every sense of 'self', over the long term. It started with logical things, like drug testing truckers, as I was. Pilots and Military as well. These things made sense, and still do so people supported it. Then, well, drug test high school students, welfare recipients and the goober flipping hamburgers at burger king. The logic making it right over the violation any testing of any type represents, went out the window long ago, IMO.

One inch leads to 20 miles and on it goes. The fact no one ever said stop before doesn't make it any less important to say stop now, eh?
edit on 19-9-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in